So it seems the greater majority of our faculty is here to stay!

For this year, anyway.

As students here at Fairfield, we are all familiar with the concept of procrastination. Paper due tomorrow? Start it tomorrow. One hundred twenty pages to read by 3 p.m.? Read it over lunch.

Faculty threatening to seek employment elsewhere? We’ll worry about it next year.

One of these things is not like the other. We as students can afford to procrastinate, because our tasks affect our own grades, our futures – ourselves.

However, if a problem has the potential to destroy the reputation of an educational institution due to the imminent departure of its greatest asset, you probably shouldn’t sweep it under the rug for the time being.

The Memo of Understanding (MOU) that the faculty approved last Friday might seem to have addressed the problems of the dissolution of the 95th percentile benchmark. (Don’t know what any of that means? Click here)

However, it states that a new benchmark system must be implemented for the next school year, even though it must first be agreed upon by the General Faculty and administration.

Sound familiar?

You might be asking why the administration is being criticized in this editorial, even though the faculty themselves agreed to the most recent MOU. One should note that a third of those who voted rejected this MOU.

One should also note that the MOU should have been signed as far back as March, so it’s easy to see why many faculty members would want to acknowledge the hard work of the Faculty Salary Committee in these debates and accept the temporary solution provided to them.

We at The Mirror would also like to acknowledge the efforts put forward by the Faculty Salary Committee, who have tirelessly renegotiated through a sea of bureaucracy to reach a temporarily acceptable agreement.

In closing, the administration should know better than to take on the habits of its students.

About The Author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.