Mirror - Vol. 07, No. 17 - February 09, 1984

              'The Image
of
Fairfield"
t s
FAIRFIELD W \\ [MIRRORI Nonprofit Organization
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
Permit No. 32
Fairfield, Conn.
Thursday, February 9, 1984 Fairfield University, Fairfield, Connecticut 06430 Incorporated 1977
Townhouse Lottery
Draws Junior Protest
by Christine Ryan
As the townhouse tussles continue, it is still un-clear
who should bear the brunt of the students'
complaints. Phyllis Fitzpatrick, Director of Stu-dent
Housing, stated, "The final decision was
made by the Office of Student Services."
However, Rev. Aloysius R Kelley, S.J., Universi-ty
President, declared, "Housing made the de-cision,
" as he commented on the situation at a
legislature meeting. Regardless of who is to
blame, the policy remains on campus, and so do
seventy-two juniors who were denied townhouses
next year through the lottery.
"The original intention of the townhouses was
to house both juniors and seniors," Mrs. Fitz-patrick
continued. "The first year, a natural split
occurred. We wanted it that way for continuity
and leadership. Without that, there occurs a
difficulty in developing norms of behavior."
"Before the new units were built, we had an
internal commitment to keep it all seniors, a con-dition
which had gradually occurred. Once the
new houses were built, then we decided to inte-grate
juniors again," Fitzpatrick stated.
The discrepancy surrounds the students' po-sition
that all of the units should be opened to
seniors first, not a set ratio. "What I have been
telling students is that the Senior class still has
the same fifty available to them, it's just that we
have offered new ones to the juniors. If we had
not built the new units, the same number of stu-dents
still would have been denied a spot."
The options for the disgruntled juniors are to
either remain on campus or move to the beach."
The current University policy demands that a stu-dent
must live on campus prior to moving into a
townhouse. Once they leave campus, they lose
their eligibility. "There is currently talk of chang-ing
that policy," Fitzpatrick stated. "If students
see a need to initiate that change, they should
take it before the University Council. If it is
changed, students would remain on campus
their sophomore year, go off-campus junior year,
and then be eligible for the townhouse lottery or
something off-campus their senior year."
Since the policy will remain through next year,
the occupants of the 24 junior units will have
"squatter's rights" to their houses. For the school
year of 85-86, if all the juniors remain, they will
compose one-third of the population, another
one-third would be new seniors, and the last one-third
would be new juniors. In other words, the
minimum number of units available for the class
of 1986 will be 26, the maximum will be 50, if no
students choose to remain.
Of the 144 groups that applied, it was an even
split of 72 male and 72 female. Of the groups that
won townhouses, 30 were male and 44 were fe-male.
The problem of sexual ratios may then be
raised. "The housing office can not evaluate it
yet," Fitzpatrick stated, "but the University may
have to take that into consideration in the future."
When asked if that might lead to a set male/fe-male
ratio, Fitzpatrick could not be sure.
Whether students will be happy with this ar-rangement
remains to be seen. A recent bill
passed by the F.U.S.A. Legislature declared that
a majority of Fairfield's students were dissatisfied
with the way the lottery was conducted. The way
the administration will react to that bill is still
unclear.
John Henske, Chairman of the Board and President of the Olin Corporation delivered an ad-dress
last week before a crowded nursing auditorium on the topic of "Ethics in Business."
He asserted that big business is often more ethical than any other institution.
[Photo by John J. Pastorelle]
Henske Discusses Ethics
by Carla Angelone
In the first of the Spring 1984 public programs
series, "Ethics in Practice," Mr. John M. Henske,
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer,
and President of Olin Corporation, spoke last
Fitzpatrick Plans Mezzanine Division
by Steven D. Lunt
Mr. James Fitzpatrick, Director of the Campus
Center, recently made a proposal to all the com-muters
at the October 27,1983 Commuter Club
meeting. Because of a need for office space, he
said that he would like to move the Commuter
lounge, presently adjacent to the Stag-Her Inn,
into the mezzanine. Mr. Fitzpatrick stressed that
it is the Commuter Club's decision whether to
move or not to move.
The proposed plan is to block off a portion of
the mezzanine by using semi-permanent parti-tions.
There would also be a partition to prevent
students using the upper mezzanine from look-ing
down into the new lounge. Cabinets and
shelves would be provided, and all partitions
would be installed by the same company who
constructed the new info booth in the Campus
Center lobby.
The present Commuter Club lounge would be
converted into offices, which will prevent any fu-ture
choice to move back into the present lounge.
The Commuter Club has been reviewing ballots
cast last week, and the results should be forth-coming
soon.
Even if the move is approved by a majority of
commuters, the plan must still meet the approval
of the Administration.
Part of the reason for a commuter lounge is to
provide a place for students to leave books and
belongings during the day. The partitions would
not be permanent, which would pose a problem
to the safety of commuter club possessions be-ing
left there for a longer period of time.
Delia Smith, a commuter, suggests tnat a com-muter
lounge in the mezzanine might cause hard
feelings between resident students and com-muters.
She also said that most commuters like
having the lounge in the Campus Center, be-cause
of its central location. The commuters
previously had a lounge in one of the dorms,
which was less convenient than the present one.
The commuter ballots were due in on Wednes-day,
February 8, and reviewed by Mr. Fitzpatrick
and the administration. Mr. Fitzpatrick declined
to comment on the situation until the ballots were
reviewed.
Mr. Fitzpatrick did state in the sheet outling his
ideas, that the mezzanine was never meant to be
a study area.
Brousseau Receives Biology Grant
'MilWIHlJlTiM lIMm mm
Dr. Diane Brousseau, an associate professor of Biology at Fairfield,
received a grant for her work in the field of marine biology.
[Photo by John J. Pastorelle]
by Chris Tyler
A grant of $15,000 was awarded to Dr. Diane Brousseau, associate
professor of biology, to begin researching the life cycle of the soft shell
clam in the Long Island Sound. Depending on the availabily of funds,
an additional grant of $55,000 is expected to be forthcoming in June
of this year. Fairfield University will be matching the grant money by
adding an additional $58,000.
The soft shell clam is not thought of as a resource in Connecticut
waters. Dr. Brousseau hopes to further the research done earlier on
locating sites of clam beds. She hopes to more accurately pinpoint ex-isting
beds and locate new ones. If large, productive beds can be loca-ted
then Dr. Brousseau feels that clam fishing could become a viable
operation in the sound. Presently a problem exists in the fishing of the
clams. Bacterial contamination, caused chiefly by sewage, of the clams
can lead to health problems when they are ingested. Should sizable
beds be located then a facility may be erected to decontaminate the
clams. One such facility is in use on the Thames river for hard shell
clams.
The life cycle of the clam will also be studied according to Dr. Brous-seau.
The purpose of this aspect of the study is to determine the safe
level at which the clams can be harvested without impairing the
reproductive habits and population growth of the clams.
Dr. Brousseau submitted her application for her study after learning
that a federal funding agency had allocated a sum of money to the state
of Connecticut. Three or four other applications were also accepted ac-cording
to Dr. Brousseau. She concluded that she believes that her work
will have important effects in the near future for the fishing industry and
for the mapping of the clam bed locations.
Tuesday night to a packed audience in the Nurs-ing
Auditorium on the subject of Business Ethics.
A graduate of Yale University, Mr. Henske
joined Dow Chemical Co. in 1948 where he rose
to be Director, and Vice President and General
Manager of Chemicals and Metals. After 21 years
with Dow, Mr. Henske joined Olin Corporation in
1969.
Ethical situations are an inescapable facet of
any profession, and business is certainly no ex-ception.
Henske commented that we all know
that ethical dilemmas exist, our concern is how
these problems are dealt with.
Mr. Henske began his lecture by stating that
he believed big business to be more ethical than
most institutions in our society. This he believes
is due to several factors. First, because large cor-porations
do not have many of the economic
pressures that are a major problem for most other
institutions, thus corporations can afford to think
the right way. Secondly, the politics carried on
in other institutions, hospitals for example, is not
part of big business. Therefore, Mr. Henske af-firmed
politics does not interfere with the cor-porate
ethical-decision making process. Finally,
because group decision-making is a process
characteristic of large corporations, it is unlike-ly
that a whole group can reach the morally
wrong choice when making an ethical decision.
Mr. Henske cited the outstanding safety record
of large corporations. "Industry sees to it that the
attitude of the employee towards safety is
changed," Henske asserted, "as evidenced by
the statistics which show that the household of
a corporation employee is three times as safe as
the household of a non-corporate employee." Mr.
Henske stressed the concern of corporations for
the safety and welfare of their employees.
According to Mr. Henske, the problem is not
that corporations by their nature create situations
that promote ethical controversy, but rather that
most ethical problems do not originate within the
company but are brought into the company from
the outside. A person's (employee's) basic moral
fiber is a result of their upbringing and ex-periences,
he pointed out, and these established
moral attitudes are inevitably brought to the job.
Corporations do not train moral behavior but they
must grapple with the ethical dilemmas that arise
as a result of people's inability to deal with cer-tain
situations.
Henske stated that the abuse of company serv-ices,
for example, is a major problem for most
companies today. He explained that the corpo-ration
creates a trusting environment by provid-ing
certain services (WATS lines, etc.) expecting
that these services will help the employee to do
their job more efficiently and effectively. It is the
employee who creates the problem because of
the human temptation to misuse these services
for personal use. As a result, the company faces
the problem of where the ethical balance lies be-tween
creating a trusting environment and estab-
(Continued on Page 2) .