If

ICLU executive
speaks with students

Speaking to what he termed “the
most receptive group” he has
spoken to in six months, Howard
Weinburg, the executive director
of the Iowa Civil Liberties Union,
addressed a group of students in
the South Lounge last Wednesday
afternoon. While speaking to
varied topics, he \vas pressed with
questions dealing primarily with
the legalities of affirmative action
in the state of Iowa. Although
disciaiming legal expertise in
these areas, he was familiar with a
number of current trends and
pending cases which relate to sex
discrimination and affirmative
action,

The main thrust of Weinburg’s
statements was that the best in-
surance an institution has against
a lawsuit claiming sex
discrimination is a clear af-
firmative action policy. He was
quick to establish the difference
between a quota system, which he
said is discriminatory and thus
unconstitutional, and a system of
goals toward which a “good faith”
effort could be demonstrated by an
institution.

Since the term “affirmative

 

by Chris Lower

action” seems to mean so many
different things to different people,
Weinburg attempted to outline the
steps generally considered to
accompany an affirmative action
commitment:

After laying down the specific
goals of an attirmative action
policy, the first step in carrying it
out is a definitive job description.
He stated that oftentimes in a
small private institution such as
ours, job descriptions are more-
intuitive and nebulous than those
supplied by larger, more
bureaucratized organizations,
in order to compare two applicants
strictly on qualifications, the
qualifications must obviously be
specified beforehand

Next, an active effort must be
demonstrated to advertise in
places and in such a manner that
minorities will be aware of the job
opening and encouraged to apply.
For example, there are numerous
women's caucuses being formed to
facilitate the flow of this in-
formation to qualified women
looking for employment

Finally, in examining the ap-
plicant pool, the hiring institution

photo by com Louie!

Harold Weiuburg. executive director of the Iowa Civil Liberties
Union, discussing outlines for an affirmative action commitment.

 

 

must follow a commitment to hire
a minority applicant, all other
things being equal

A tew tricky questions were
raised in response to this outline,
such as: “If two people apply for a
job, and they both meet all of the
criteria for the job description, but
the non-minority applicant has
other qualifications which exceed
those of the original job descrip-
tion, must the minority person be
hired, or how can the over-
qualification be taken Into ac-
count?” Weinburg admitted that
he had no simple answer for this
type of question, and pointed out
that the only definitive answers
“will be obtained in the courts.”

Another quandary which arose in
the discussion, and which is at the
heart of philosophical debates
concerning affirmative action was
this: Experience is a standard
criterion for job qualification.
Given that women have been
deprived of employment op
portunities in many fields up until
this time, is not the discrimination
continued by specifying previous
experience as a qualification? This
is an issue which will have to be
addressed when an affirmative
action plan is drafted by the school,

(At this time, there is a coma
mittee being established to draw
up an affirmative action proposal
for Grinnell. This committee is
being headed up by Dean Mary
Eysenbach and will idclude both
student and faculty members.)

Students pressed for possible
courses of action which they could
take to insure that Grinnell will not
be a discriminatory institution in
its hiring practices. Weinburg
pointed out that this depends on the
stance that people wish to assume
toward the school. One alter-
native would be to report alleged
discriminatory practices to the
Civil Rights Commission, upon
whose recommendation, a court‘
case could be pressed against the
College,

Weinburg continued to say that,
“if you have some commitment to
the school, and that, in fact, is Why
you want to change it . . , what
kinds of threats do you want to use
against it? And that is something
that you have to think about. . ,

“If you are not going to court,
then what you are really having is
an argument about what Grinnell
has to do in order not to be
discriminatory. The first thing you
have to do is get a commitment
from the people who run the school

i and I assume that you are
among those people. (At this point
there broke but low murmurs
accompanied by much head-
shaking.) And if you are not among
those people , , I would be con-
cerned about that." But he re
emphasized that in order for
students to have any effective
input into the question of
discriminatory hiring, that they
would have to assess their values
carefully and operate from this
assessment. . ’ ',

Grinnell College
Grinnell, Iowa

10/15/76 Vol. 85 No.76

Congressman Ed Mezvinsky brought his energetic campa n
style to Grinnell last Tuesday and Wednesday. Mezvinsky, a
reform Democrat, is running tor reelection in the first district oi-

lowa, which includes Griiineli.

chain by Chip toilet

 

A confident

Mezvinsky

makes campaign

appearance

on campus

y Jim Strickier

A confident, at ease Ed Mez-
vinsky enjoyed a pleasant visit to a
iriendiy Grinnell College campus
last Tuesday and Wednesday. A
two-term incumbent Democrat, in
a Democratic district at a place
that “traditionally has been
friendly,” Mezvinsky had reasons
to be confident. _

He exuded the enthusiasm of
someone looking forward to the
handshaking and the meeting of
crowds in a . campaign
Mezvinsky has only just recently
been able to campaign full time
because of his duties in
Washington. Because of his
prominent position on the
Judiciary Committee during the
Nixon days, he is, unlike many
congressmen, very well known and
respected in his district, He was
ready to talk energetically, par
ticularly about reform of Congress.
Asking him a question about in-
stitutional reform is like asking
Dave McConnell about in
stitutional food. It is obviously a
topic close to his heart.

Mezvinsky said that college
campuses have always been his
strength, Consequently, he sees
one of his major jobs, particularly

on college campuses, as making

sure the vote gets out.

 

There is a different atmosphere,
Mezvinsky maintained, on cam-
puses today than four years ago.
“They (college students) worked
very strongly against Richard
Nixon. They saw what happened.
They were burned . . . Then they
see how their leaders lied to them.
That doesn’t mean they are not
interested . . . They are more in—
trospective. They are more
concerned about what happens
after they graduate,"

While at Grinneii, Mezvinsky
made three appearances on
campus. Tuesday evening he
talked informally with students in
the Pub, Wednesday morning. in a
nonscampaign appearance, he
spoke to Professor Gilmour's
“Political Parties and Pressure
Groups” class on being a
congressman. Wednesday at-
ternoon he held a question and
answer session in South Lounge

in the session with the Class,
Mezvinsky, a member of the House
Democratic Steering and Policy
Committee, emphasized the need
to continue “institutional reform”
of Congress. He said that since his
election in 1972, he and other
recently-elected Democratic

(continued on page 6)

 

