Volume XCI Number 26
University of Southern California
Friday February 19, 1982
Stag photo bv Adam Schaffer
SIXTIES FLASHBACK — Student senators and concerned students stage a sit in at Student Administrative Services to protest a proposed tuition increase. The students protested poor services by the university.
40 students stage sit-in at SAS
Protest tuition, inadequate services
By Eric Onstad and Brenda Wong
Staff Writers
Approximately 40 students chanted, marched and carried signs as they staged a sit-in in the Student Administrative Services building Thursday afternoon to protest tuition increases and inadequate student services.
The protest organized by the Student Senate ended after fames Appleton, vice president of Student Affairs, informed the students that disciplinary action would result if they stayed after the building closed.
By the time the 90-minute protest ended at 5:45 p.m., the students had received television, radio and newspaper coverage plus a promise from Jon Strauss, vice president, administration, that he would meet with students today.
Strauss telephoned his promise to the students from his office in Bovard Administration building and left Appleton and Jim Dennis, associate vice president of Campus Life and Recreation, to deal with the sit-in.
Ten minutes before the rally was to begin, a tour group passed by Student Union w'ondering what was happening. Some members of the tour had surprised looks while others were impassive.
Mark Slavkin. financial affairs chairman of the Student Senate, gave instructions to the students that gathered at the Student Union.
“We are planning to go over to SAS and sit in the lobby,” Slavkin said. “ We are going to walk in as quietly, as peacefully and as orderly as possible. W'e’re going to say to them, ‘We know' the building closes at 5 o’clock and we know you want to leave,’ ” Slavkin said.
He quickly tried to quell fears of some protesters that the demonstration could turn into three-day sit-in. He encouraged them to stick it out until the last moment.
“(The administration) has a responsibility to recognize our needs and the frustrations of the students,” he said.
Dennis followed the students as they marched from the Gwynn Wilson Student Union Building at 4:15 p.m. They entered the SAS building chanting and stomping their feet and then planted themselves in the main lobby. They booed and hissed as administration officials w'alked by.
The students carried signs with slogans such as “West Coast Harvard — Why aren’t we in the Top 10?” and “Fix USC. then raise tuition.”
As the group entered the virtually empty building, one student said, “Wouldn’t you know
that w'e would sit in on a day where there are no lines.”
After the students had situated themselves among the surprised staff, the group began to pound on the floor, made hissing noises and chanted "The bucks stop here!”
The protesters gained momentum as they responded to questions tossed out by a student in the group. “Are we proud of our library system? Is the football team worth $10,000 a year? Are we proud of our administrators in Tokyo?” were a sampling of the questions which raised the crowd's anger.
Slavkin. who organized the protest read a prepared statement. He began by informing the students that President James H. Zumberge was out of the country.
“What’s new?” someone in the crowd shouted back.
“The university has no right to increase tuition until it brings its services and programs up to an acceptable level,” Slavkin said.
He went on to make a specific demand of the university administration.
“We call on the president of the university, James H. Zumberge.” the statement continued, “to officially waive the fee that students must pay for their unofficial and official transcripts ($2 and $4) until such time as he can officially commit the university to a definite schedule for improving the 10 areas spelled out in the student agenda.”
Within a few minutes, SAS employees came out to see what the commotion was about. Some stood mystified, not quite sure of what was going on. Others came out, looked and went back to work.
During a rare moment of quiet, Slavkin said, “We’re not here for the thrill of sitting here on the floor. We're here to deliver a statement. It’s unfortunate to have to resort to this type of platform.”
One university official, Jay Berger, came down from the third floor and stood by, briefcase open, finishing work and observing the situation.
Berger, dean of Admissions, said the students were “doing a good job.”
“They are peaceful and getting their point across. They have legitimate concerns," he said.
Many of the concerns are shared by staff members, Berger said.
“Some of the most frustrated are those who are working here,” he said.
(Continued on page 11)
Professor, 66, accepts forced retirement rule
By Laura Castaneda
Staff Writer
Despite a steady flow of letter-writing and petition-signing, educational counseling professor Earl Carnes, 66, has little hope of winning his fight against his mandatory retirement, to be enforced June 30, 1982.
“I don’t think there’s a chance in a thousand,” he said.
Carnes is one of many professors who. because of the new faculty retirement policy, will have no choice but to leave their positions after this semester. This policy requires that all professors reaching age 65 or over this year retire.
Because of a revision in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the upper age limit for mandatory retirement was raised from 65 to 70. A second revision permits college and universities to retire tenured faculty at age 65 until July 1,1982. After this date, if a professor is continued on tenure into the next year, he or she must be kept on until age 70 because of the new laws.
However, the university has decided to retire all professors who are 65 or older on June 30, 1982. These faculty members may be employed on a full-time or part-time basis after July 1, but these appointments will span a period of one year or less, and they do not cam' any con atment for further appointment.
Furthermore, in order to be hired on the full- or part-time basis, professors must first be recommended by their departments, then must go through a screening and interview session for each year that they are re-hired.
It is this facet of the policy that Carnes has particularly objected to and has forced him to decide to accept his retirement.
“I’m not going to do it (reapply)," he said. “There is a loss of fringe benefits and at least a 10 percent pay cut.
“I’ve been here 33 years. 20 as a full-time professor. This (reapplication each year) is demeaning. A lot of joy has gone for me when I have to go through that not even knowing if I'll be continued or not.” h<= said.
When asked why the university was forcing retirement on professors, Carnes said. “It was done as a matter of finances.” He explained that people his age are at the top of the pay scale. If younger people are hired to teach, it will save the university money.
“That’s my hunch," the professor said.
Students who have Carnes as a professor are not concerned with saving the university’s money, they are clearly upset by the actions being taken against him. They have signed petitions stating that Carnes’ classes were very' popular and that his teaching skills "have not, in any observable way. been reduced because of age.”__(Continued on page 8)
Master building plan calls for campus revitalization
By Andrew O’Brien
The university once consisted of a few clapboard buildings with the Alumni House as the central focus of the campus.
But that was in 1880. Two hundred buildings and several tuition hikes later, the university is planning a cinema school complex as well as continuing its beautification of the campus.
Tom Coffin, assistant director of architectual services, said the university is following a master building plan—a flexible guidance system which was formulated in 1962 and is dependent on private funding.
Since 1962, the university has bought or constructed 130 buildings through these donations. Buildings often bear the names of their contributors, an example being the remodeling and renaming of Founder’s Hall to Taper Hall of Humanities.
Coffin said plans for the $12 million cinema complex, half funded by George Lucas, the successful director and a university alumnus, will be pre-
sented to the university July 15.
The plan calls for the construction of five buildings in the performing arts parking lot next to Bing Theatre.
Building plans also call for the remodeling of Trojan Dining Hall and the construction of a parking structure across from the Shrine Auditorium.
The Seeley G. Mudd building facing Vermont Avenue, which will house the departments of psychology, chemistry and astronomy, is due for completion this year.
The master plan also dictates policy for landscaping and beautification. The hilled park in the Performing Arts complex and the fountain at the north entrance are examples of this landscaping plan.
Because the university has grown and developed on a city grid pattern, asphalt streets still dominate university grounds.
University landscaping plans would discontinue this pattern by replacing the streets with mall w'alkwavs similar to the
(Continued on page 5)