peterr@utcsrgv.UUCP (Peter Rowley) (06/01/84)
Thanks to those people who replied to my two articles on the story related in Tim Maroney's postings. I'd like to clarify my articles somewhat. Firstly, someone at UNC reminded me that only certain CS faculty were involved in the decisions reported on, not all UNC faculty. This is a point that is very well taken; please consider all references to "UNC" in my articles to refer only to those faculty involved. Note, though, that I still hesitate in accepting the Maroney postings as a complete record of what happened-- the point of my articles was to comment on a *mythical* situation which may well be a good precedent. How close that situation is to reality is questionable without hearing from the UNC faculty involved. Secondly, I've been admonished for equating respect for a contract with blind following of authority. I perhaps stated my case too strongly. My feelings arose from TCWheeler's comments about "the blatant disregard for the edicts of my employer, be they good or bad" and similar comments by others, indicating a willingness to do almost anything as long as it is ordered by someone in authority. I was very startled by this; it really is a dangerous thing. But I did not mean that one should break contracts capriciously. As a matter of tactics, if one wants to challenge an employment condition in the courts, breaking the condition, being fired, and then taking the firing to court would seem to be the way to do it. This is clearly not undertaken lightly. Note that the relationship between my comments on following authority and Tim's case are very indirect-- my comments were directed to some attitudes exhibited in other articles discussing the case (esp. TCWheeler's). Trying to guess the legalities of Tim's actions with respect to his employment contract, when we don't even have a copy of what he signed, is pretty much a loser's game, I'd think. p. rowley, U. Toronto