Word: beasleyisms
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...RACIAL discrimination complaint is hardly the only turf on which Brown-Beasley is waging his fight. Indeed his full-time battle to overturn his dismissal--marked by at times daily distribution of accusatory, informational or questioning letters to members of the administration--has generated additional disputes that have helped stalemate his appeal proceeding. One of the less substantive disagreements, the mini-war of nerves over Harvard's non-recognition of Brown-Beasley's student nominee to the appeal panel, suggests not only the degree of legalism in Brown-Beasley's appeal efforts but also his overwhelming suspicion of Harvard...
...dispute centers on whether Harvard has "failed" to officially recognize Glenn E. "Buddy" Diamond '78, Brown-Beasley's student nominee to the three-member appeal panel. Harvard argues that it has notified Brown-Beasley of its recognition directly and Diamond indirectly--by sending him a photocopy of its letter to Brown-Beasley. University officials also state that they have no right not to recognize Diamond and therefore no real obligation to recognize him officially. However, both Brown-Beasley and Diamond suspect that Harvard wants to block the sitting of an undergraduate on the appeal panel, and partially for this reason...
...result, Diamond and Fiscal Services Director Gibson's representative, Thomas O'Brien, have not yet met to name the third or "neutral" member of the appeal board, raising the possibility that O'Brien--and eventually Harvard--will argue that Brown-Beasley's case has gone "stale." It seems at this point, with Harvard's public statement that it cannot block Diamond's membership on the panel, that Brown-Beasley and his representative should move on to more substantive disputes...
This would not necessarily move the appeal hearing ahead. Brown-Beasley has declared that Diamond will also not act until two Harvard officials--Daniel Steiner '54, general counsel to the University, and Walter J. Leonard, special assistant to the president--respond to several inquiries Brown-Beasley has made about affirmative action policy and aspects of the appeal procedure, and until Brown-Beasley has initiated possible litigation on those responses. Both Steiner and Leonard have refused to reply, asserting that they may eventually be involved in judging the appeal panel's recommendations, which are assessed finally by the University's president...
...this case some of Brown-Beasley's arguments are weak, but several raise serious questions that Steiner's arguments do not answer. On the one hand Leonard is probably right not to rule now on Brown-Beasley's query, a request for an investigation of his racial discrimination complaint, which would best first be handled by the appeal panel. Yet it is hard to understand why Steiner--who for one need not, as Brown-Beasley notes, ultimately rule on the case--will not respond to certain fundamental procedural questions Brown-Beasley has raised. These questions include: 1) questions about...