01/12/06 12:37 - ID#25311

is my thinking elitist?

So I got into a debate the other day about something. I wanted to put it out there just to get some other views on the topic. When living as a student on a college campus there are certain rules in place. As a professional employee of that institution, when the job requires you live on site, should you be required to live exactly like a student? Should this professional be seen as a student or as their own separate entity as an employee of the institution?

My argument is that the professional is absolutely a separate entity and should be entitled to live their life as 'normal', not bound by those rules set in place for students. As a live-in professional, this place is your home. You don't have anywhere else to go, you LIVE there. Now don't get too excited, I'm not talking about breaking the law - I'm talking about small simple things, like the ability to have a shot of vodka in your cranberry juice, or burn incense while doing yoga. I think there is always some hierarchy in the working world, and you earn and deserve certain privileges.

The opposing argument was that this view of small privileges is elitist and that every human being on that campus should be treated exactly the same. That the professional should not have one ounce of luxury above what any student has. That my privilege in this situation is that I get paid to live here. I disagree a thousand percent.

Perhaps I am simply biased because I actually LIVE this scenario. Yet even when I was a student in the residence halls, I didn't have an issue with the fact that my Hall Director was allowed to have a candle burning, so maybe I'm not biased after all.

What's your take on it?

P.S. Jim, I'm a hall director (the professional in charge of the RA's).

james writes at 01:34:29 01/15/06 - Comment #3616: I think the only problem in this issue is that you are a woman. Men can, and theology will back me up on this, deserve superior treatment to all other living (play)things. By virtue of your inferior status you should not be allowed that shot of vodka in yoru cranberry. In fact, the only thing you should be allowed are maternity cloths and a hot stove.

that being said, I am incredably kidding. This conversation just seemed to need a little levity.

metalpeter writes at 02:47:44 01/14/06 - Comment #3600: First of all Ladycroft sorry, I slightly misunderstood you. I thought you oversaw the RA's or where the equalant of head RA. I didn't know that you where incharge of 5 buildings on campus. That changes everything. In that case You should have your own private place or housing that is the equalant of the school paying for an apartment. In this case you can do anything that dosn't break the law or school policies that would apply to teachers.

ladycroft writes at 11:41:26 01/14/06 - Comment #3594: Peter, what you're describing is the RA position. Those are student leader positions where they monitor a floor. I am a Hall Director. I supervise 6 desk attendants, 8 RA's, 2 RAC's and 2 workstudy students. I manage 5 residence buildings on campus. I am not a student here, I am a staff memeber. :)

metalpeter writes at 06:59:24 01/13/06 - Comment #3572: "So I got into a debate the other day about something. I wanted to put it out there just to get some other views on the topic. When living as a student on a college campus there are certain rules in place. As a professional employee of that institution, when the job requires you live on site, should you be required to live exactly like a student? Should this professional be seen as a student or as their own separate entity as an employee of the institution?" -ladycroft

My beliefs is that you should have to follow the same rules. I do admit that you should be treated better then the students and you should get perks and you should be able to come and go as you please. But I assume that the rules that they have are rules that pertain to the building (the students just stay there). For example no candles and no cooking are both to prevent fires. But rules that have to do with being responseable could be differant. I think one problem with having to sets of rules is that it alienates the students. How can you break up a party where there is drinking when you drink in your apartment. (assuming it is legal drinking) When rules are differant it takes away the creditbilty of the RA.
I don't think the employee should not be seen as a student. I think they should be able to live there during breaks and during the summer as long as there are classes.
I admit that the situation is differant at differant schools. I never lived in the dorms. But My understanding was that Hall Heads where students who showed that could watch over the dorms or at least a floor in the dorms. For doing that they got some kinds of perks.

uncutsaniflush writes at 06:19:11 01/13/06 - Comment #3571: Jim,

you ask an easy question, employment-based health insurance is by definition elitist since it results in a group that does have health insurance and a group that does not merely on the basis of the type of employment one has.

A better question would be - "Is it morally wrong to accept health insurance under such circumstances?"

And before I could answer, I would feel moved ask a question or two more about the exact circumstances.

Historically, some employers have offered health benefits to workers not to join unions. In other words, selective health benefit offers were used as a union-busting weapon. In such a case, it might be wrong if a union is really necessary in that industry to protect employees.

And of course, if unions are good or bad is whole 'nother kettle of fish.

I am sometimes amazed how I can make the simplest thing complicated. Go me.

jim writes at 01:01:49 01/13/06 - Comment #3566: And as a follow, I'll pose a more difficult question:

If someone is offered health insurance through their job, is it elitist to accept it unless everyone is offered insurance?

jim writes at 12:41:05 01/13/06 - Comment #3565: Most of the limitations on the rights of student residents are due to safety issues or liability issues. Hot plates are a fire hazard, as are candles, incense. Colleges get sued for allowing drinking in dormitories. It can also be something that the school's insurance policy prohibits. So, the rules governing student residents are required by the circumstances and legalities involved.

It's vary rare that everyone living in the same space has to follow the same rules. Whether or not that's a bad thing is dependent on the context. I don't think this is a case worth getting upset about.

Ladycroft has a good position to negotiate better conditions for herself. I don't think she should feel bad trying to get a better deal then the student population. She's not one of them, and they're not being treated badly. If she sacrificed their freedoms to further hers, that's one thing.

Solidarity is great and all, but not everything has to be equal. If the President of the college was given a house that was on campus, you can bet he'd have different rules.

I know someone could take my justification for this situation and apply it to other situations where it would make me appear to advocate evil things. But I don't care. Shades of grey and all that.

jim writes at 11:49:25 01/13/06 - Comment #3563: Leetee,

She runs the RA program right? She's a staff member, not a student. She's above them organizationally. What's wrong with that?

jenks writes at 02:18:23 01/13/06 - Comment #3559

Ok, I'm a little sleep-deprived and maybe I'm missing something, but I'm with ladycroft on this one and must admit I'm not even sure what's to debate.

1- most college students are not yet 21, and thus having alcohol would be ILLEGAL. No brainer.
2- My school didn't have RA's, but aren't they usually seniors, i.e. students? If so, I think it's totally reasonable that they be held to all the same rules as the rest of the students. But as an EMPLOYEE (or someone who has already graduated), I think different rules can and should apply.

But I do agree there needs to be a certain amount of discretion/propriety etc. E.g. just because you're >21 doesn't mean you should be allowed to be wasted in front of the studs all the time. But duh.

but yeah- i see no problem in a different set of rules for post-graduate students/advisors etc. I don't think it's so elitist and awful to say students can't have stoves but ladycroft can...

ajay writes at 12:45:59 01/13/06 - Comment #3554: Heck, when I was in Governors, the RAs had all the fun. The chicks hung out in their rooms, they had booze, porno movies all the time, funny-smelling cigarettes, etc.

I forget what the question was...

joshua writes at 10:43:21 01/12/06 - Comment #3551: I think that setting an example is why they expect more of a professional appearance. Whether you think thats the proper way to go is your thing though.

leetee writes at 08:43:10 01/12/06 - Comment #3549: ABOVE THEM? (e:Jim)?

I am so fucked here if that is what people think...

jim writes at 08:29:11 01/12/06 - Comment #3547: You need to get together a list of what other colleges allow their staff to do and bring it to your supervisor at Hilbert. Negotiate. You don't want to spend the next semester angry, and you're in a good (righteous) position to argue for better treatment.

Do you have a contract with the college? Does it give any of the particular rules? If it's not in your contract that you have to obey the student rules, then you probably don't.

This doesn't really help you with the question you asked, but I don't think you are being elitist in the negative sense. You aren't a student, you're a staff member. Don't worry about putting yourself above them, you are above them - it's in your job title.

leetee writes at 08:20:21 01/12/06 - Comment #3543: I don't care who knows that it is and was me that you had that discussion with, (e:Ladycroft).

I never once claimed the person who is employed by any school should not be treated like a separate entity. I think everyone should be treated like a separate entity. Hence the reason i think everyone should have the same rights and priviledges that lives in the same space. Whether it is a choice to take a job or be in a chosen feild of employ. Or to live on campus in residence.

Doesn't matter why they are there. That they are a professional. Or a student. Not all proffessionals are resposible. And not all students are irresponsible. The rules apply. To all people. Period. Anything else is elitist, by definition.

The students live there, too. Is a home any less of a home because it is temporary? Do they deserve less from the temporary home they are trying to create simply because they will be there less time? I don't think so.

If a student is 21, they should be able to have the same shot of vodka in their cranberry juice as anyone else who lives there.

Because you lived both sides and didn't have a problem with being a resident student and not having the same things your hall director had doesn't mean you don't have a bias. It just means that you were ok with the status quo, and still are. Doesn't make the status quo any more right or even wrong.

Because i didn't live it, do not live it and can't live it, i see from the outside perspective how unfair it is. Life is unfair. Why perpetuate that? Why not give students the same little things that make a home a home that would make your home a home?

(e:Kangarooboi) -- Just because grade 9 students got treated like shit, does it mean they have to turn around and treat grade 9 students like shit in later years? I mean, who cares if resident life was crap then. More reason to make it better now.

uncutsaniflush writes at 07:48:39 01/12/06 - Comment #3542: Apparently I am a sloppy reader - I didn't realize that (e:ladycroft) was posting a common from (e:Kangarooboi).

Thus the bulk of previous comment should have been addressed to (e:Kangarooboi) and not (e:ladycroft).

My apologies to both worthies.

uncutsaniflush writes at 06:52:26 01/12/06 - Comment #3540: ladycroft,

You say that you deserve more priviledges than the students you oversee because you are adult, because you "already paid your debt society," because you have several degrees, etc.

This is prima facie evidence of elitism.

The dictionary defines elitism as "The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources."

On the other hand, elitism isn't necessarily always negative. In our society, we act as if we believe that excellence and achievement SHOULDbe rewarded - in other words our society tends to be meritocratic. Meritocracy is, of course, elitist. But how many of us really believe that the achievement and excellence shouldn't be rewarded? Shouldn't the best and brightest be rewarded for their achievements?

"elitism" is a sticky wicket, indeed.

I'm tending to think that you should be allowed to have liquior and candles and incense in your "home" at Hilbert even though it leaves me a bit uncomfortable.

ladycroft writes at 06:10:47 01/12/06 - Comment #3539: From Kangarooboi:
My view on this matter is very simple and is actually very similiar to you. As you know, here at UB, the RHD/AHD apartments are considered to be seperate
entities of the Residence Halls. We are allowed to cook in our apartments (ie: they provide us with a stove, fridge etc)whereas the students are not. We are allowed to have and use candles as long as we are not careless with them. We are allowed to have alcohol, microwaves, george forman grills etc.

It is the stance of the Professional Staff here at UB that we are adults. Much like you have said in your post, this is our home. We LIVE here, not just stay
here. With that being said, we are entittled to the benefits and luxeries (sorry for the mispelling) of any home that we would be living in if we were not
working/living here. The same should be allowed for you as well.

You have paid your debt to society. You have gone through the terror of residence hall living, and the perils of achieving your bachelors and your first masters degree. For your institution to tell you that you are unable to excerise your rights as an adult, in your OWN home is ridiculious. I would fight that to the very end. I cannot believe that they woudl expect you to abide by the same rules as the students. Your apartment is that of your own. You do not pay anything to go there. You are doing them a service and get paid for it (if you can call it that). You should be entitles to having the luxeries of a regular home living.