The administration of Saginaw Valley State University is defending its policy of prohibiting its resident assistants from posting anything critical of the school on social media.
One RA, Devon Waslusky, was put on probation for posting the following comments on a Facebook group’s page:
“So we have quiet hours for a reason, right? And that reason is so people who have to be up late for one reason or another can get an adequate amount of sleep, right? Well, if quiet hours are a thing and last till 10 a.m., then why are Facilities [mowing] right outside my open window (and I assume others’ as well) before 10 a.m.? That’s not OK.”
Waslusky then received a letter of reprimand which stated “Any comments posted on social media regarding the goals and expectations of the resident assistant position are to be positive in nature …”
He was not brought back as an RA the following year.
SVSU’s Director of Media & Community Relations J.J. Boehm responded, “We at SVSU respect students’ First Amendment rights. We believe our record of this is one of which we can be proud, though we know some may disagree with this assessment.”
Indeed, someone has: The Student Press Law Center’s Frank LoMonte, who “bluntly called SVSU’s actions unconstitutional.”
“The law is quite clear and there really is not room for debate — a state university can’t force students, even student employees, to say only positive things about the university when they’re posting on social media,” he says.
It’s certainly true that employees of state/state-related institutions have greater free speech rights than those in the private arena.
In addition, in Waslusky’s case, SVSU’s own policies regarding RA behavior say very little about social media, and “[n]oticeably absent is a provision in the contract or job duties that require that all comments to be positive as Mr. Waslusky’s letter-of-reprimand would indicate.”
The Saginaw Valley Journal editorial from which the last quote comes is chock full of hyperbole, but it is nonetheless correct in its assessment of the situation, and in its agreement with the SPLC’s LoMonte.
However, I can appreciate the university’s viewpoint in that it certainly makes sense that it would want its resident assistants to represent the school in the best terms possible. Just because one has the right to do something doesn’t mean taking the action is right.
Given his representative position, it would have been prudent for Waslusky to have contacted university officials privately about his concerns, before taking to Facebook to express them. It seems to me his very position as an RA would be given more weight in addressing (lawn mower noise) complaints than those of a typical student.
Indeed, Deborah Huntley, the SVSU provost and vice president for academic affairs, says
All employees have the right (and even responsibility) to voice concerns, through the usual channels and student employees are no different. All employees also have a responsibility to be professional in voicing those concerns. In the vast majority of cases, professionalism would dictate that employees would first use normal administrative channels.
If Waslusky’s misgivings — which certainly appear to have merit — were not addressed, then take the case to the wider university audience, including through social media.
On the flip side, sending Waslusky that reprimand, and then not retaining his services the following year seems to be an overreaction on the college’s part. Why not simply call or email him to say something like “Hey Devon, in the future please contact us directly first regarding any concern you have before taking it to social media”?
Dave Huber is an assistant editor of The College Fix. (@ColossusRhodey)
Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter
IMAGE: Lars Plougmann/Flickr
Please join the conversation about our stories on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, MeWe, Rumble, Gab, Minds and Gettr.