You can go to our Newsletters.
Or search for a word here:
Text to Search For:
Boolean: Case


WHY UC WOULD RATHER FIGHT WOMEN THAN DISCRIMINATION

There indeed exist options other than protracted legal battles. For example, Smith College, lacking UC's enormous taxpayer funded resources, has successfully dealt with entrenched patterns of discrimination among its lessenlightened faculty members through mandatory sensitivity training and the censuring and reducing of privileges of individuals and departments who violate university policy. Smith College and other institutions move quickly into settlements with women who have serious, legitimate complaints. UC, however, can afford to finance protracted legal battles for which five to seven years duration is not unusual. By why would UC want to do this?
The answer is twofold. First, it is easier. Faculty who hold lifetime positions are not easy to discipline. Buying a way out of the problem is apparently considered simpler than solving the problem. Second, most women do not have the financial resources to sustain themselves and their attorneys through a protracted case. UC administrators know that the harder it is, the more expensive it is for women to fight for their rights, the fewer the women who will step forward to do so.
Women who fight the system for their rights have sustained incredible personal hardships, from having to sell their homes to finance a tenure battle, as did UCI ophthalmologist Dr. Marjorie Mosier, to enduring foreclosure or bankruptcy, professional blacklisting, and serious stress-caused illnesses. UC administrators know that gender discrimination is so rampant that each woman's victory could encourage scores of other women to overcome their fear and file suit. UC administrators would be overwhelmed by legitimate complaints from its academic women.

-wage@wage.org-