BY DRUG TESTING ONLY ITS EMPLOYEES, EMORY SENDS MESSAGE OF INEQUALITY

Fairly or unfairly, Emory's upper administration is often criticized for
making unilateral decisions without any real consideration of the large
population segments it affects. Be it fringe benefit cuts, merging the
graduate and undergraduate deans or the number of Commencement speakers,
Emory goes through seasons of alienating large portions of its community.
This year's alienated group seems to be our staff members, who feel that
the new drug testing policy is ineffective and wrong.

This is an issue beyond drug testing, though, and touches on how we treat
our staff and how they feel at Emory. Too often, the non-faculty employees
of Emory have been made to feel that they are outside of our community.
Whether they are working in our student activities office, improving our
communication and media services, toiling in our cafeterias or giving us
counseling and career advice, the employees are the bloodline of our
University. Emory is not Orwell's Animal Farm, with some "more equal than
others." As a community, we must never forget that we are equal citizens
with the same rights to be respected and acknowledged.

An unfortunate aspect of this entire debate has been the shrouding of truth
in silence and code words. There is a reason that the Employee Council and
the Carter Center have stood against drug testing for new hires. While 30
people have been caught, did these 30 people pose any more of a threat to
Emory than current students, faculty and staff that actively take part in
drugs and alcoholism?

We must also engage in conversations on the validity of drug testing as a
method of weeding out supposedly criminal and dangerous elements at Emory.
Since hard drugs such as cocaine can be flushed out before tests, are we
catching truly dangerous drug offenders? What is the link between drug
abuse on this campus and crime? Are the people arrested on this campus for
violence drug-taking staff members? How many, if any at all, have fallen
under these criteria?

The reason stated for drug testing is that by testing new hires, the
University can protect its students from potentially dangerous people on
drugs. And what of students, faculty and upper level administrators who
take part in alcohol and drug abuse? Doesn't the Emory community deserve
protection from them as well? Considering students have far more contact
with other students than any staff member, what's the rationale behind not
testing all new students?

While I'm sure there will be some official response to this, we all know
beneath the code talk that students would not stand for drug testing. If
the notion of drug testing students was even hinted, this student body
would have this school flooded with calls from the national media and, even
worse, irate tuition-paying parents.

As for the faculty, while I agree that they are exceptional, being
exceptional does not mean they are above the law. If we are concerned about
violent drug offenders, then it must be remembered that faculty members are
human beings that are prone to the same human flaws, the same crimes and
thus the same rules and regulations above any supposed "privilege" bestowed
on them by Western civilization. Their dignity and privilege not to pee in
a cup is no more or less important than that our staff members.

I am not opposed to drug testing if we have facts, studies and statistics
that can prove that our campus is safer because of it. Drug use is illegal,
and the goal of making our campus drug free is admirable, but if we apply
certain standards to certain people in achieving this goal, we end up
delegating a major portion of University to a secondary status.

Either University President William M. Chace or the University Senate needs
to set up a review committee to comprehensively study this issue. The
committee should include members of the administration, faculty, students
and staff to determine not only the effectiveness of a drug testing policy,
but the best ways to make Emory a drug-free community. The biggest problem
is not drug testing itself, but the fact that the employees were given so
little choice or even regard in the decision. We cannot tell our employees
one minute they are members of a community, then the next tell them they
are simple workers with few rights at Emory.

If we strive to make this a community, then all voices should be welcome at
the table, not just those that pay or those that are truly paid. Students
and faculty must ask themselves what they think of this entire issue. Do
the faculty and students stand in solidarity with their fellow members of
an equal Emory community, or do they go on seeing themselves as separate
and unequal? If we accept that we are a community of citizens bonded to
this University, then let us treat all our fellow members with the same
respects and rights we bestow upon ourselves as students and as faculty.