Thursday, October 29, 2009

Revelations and Equivocations


At today's faculty union (SCEA) meeting, it was revealed that in addition to questioning faculty, the administration has been calling in not only students who attended the 22 October rally but those who spoke at the earlier 14 October Governing Board Meeting.

Unlike faculty, students are not protected by a union or other organized group. One faculty member suggested that affected students contact the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF)

At the same time, the teacher suspensions are drawing the interest of several groups. CCA (the Community College Association) is already involved. CCA is the higher education affiliate of the California Teacher's Association (CTA). Nationally, CCA is affiliated with the National Education Association (NEA), the largest public employee association in the country. Both CTA and NEA are also taking an interest in the case.

In addition, the local chapters of the ACLU and NAACP have expressed a desire to assist in the case, as have organizations like FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) and the Center for Campus Free Speech.


At 5:02 p.m. Acting Superintendent/President Nicholas Alioto (currently in charge with Chopra on vacation) issued a statement addressed to the "College Community." In the statement, Alioto claims that "no faculty have been suspended, as that is a disciplinary action. No disciplinary action has been taken."

This claim will no doubt come as a surprise to the faculty who have been left in limbo while indefinitely barred from campus and unable to teach their classes. It will probably also come as a surprise to everyone in the "College Community" who recognizes the administration's actions as an attempt to intimidate and to silence dissent.

Alioto's statement also cites "three areas" of "concern":
"a) Incitement of students to move outside the free speech area and to violate College policies"
"b) Disregard for warnings and directives of police officers"
"c) Physical confrontation with police officers"
For anyone who was present, these accusations are laughable. For those affected, they surely constitute "disciplinary action."


  1. The three areas of "concern" are vague. Didn't your writing teacher ever tell you to be specific?

  2. This is ridiculous. It seems like these press releases or statements are an attempt to make the public chase their tails. It is a complete joke. Those teachers were suspended as a result of their participation in the rally and an attempt at union busting. Anyone with half a brain can see through Choppy's infantile retaliatory tactics.
    -Coffee Girl

  3. 1) Having a "free speech area" is unconstitutional.
    2) There was frustration but no disregard of PO. No one did what the cops said we couldn't do.
    3) What does physical confrontation with PO mean? Hit a cop? Push him? Isn't that a crime? Wouldn't we have gone to jail?

  4. So, according to Alioto, there are no charges or allegations, but there are "concerns." That sure seems like a way of charging people without taking any responsibility for doing so.

  5. ehhh, i think its foul that the students have to pay for swc retardation. get rid of the idiotic admin., and change our detrimental habits. oh, &can we stop reelecting that sorry human being Schwarzenegger.

  6. Personally schwarzenegger is not part of the problem here. Cuts had to be made, because we the voters of the state didn't want taxes raised. The state is broke and is not his fault, its the fault of others who came before him, and spent like there was no tomorrow.

    I'm more worried about the way the school is handling this whole budget situation. The fact that we only have a designated "free speech" area. The fact that you can't oppose the schools stance on anything or else you'll get it. It sounds more like we have a dictator running the school.