<p>I do know some of the answers to kayf’s querys, but I will not comment further so as not to be accused of making things up or conjecture. (Because no one has ever posted anything like conjecture on CC ever before). But I have other questions as well. </p>
<p>If one wants to put emotion aside (which I admittedly have a hard time doing being somewhat intimately involved) and look at this strictly as an employer-employee relationship:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>if the terminated students did underperform in this one area of their many duties (and there are many, many duties outlined in the RA agreement, none emphasized as more important or relevant than the other), does the punishment of immediate termination without prior warning, or not being given the opportunity to remedy the area in which they were lacking, fit the crime? I’m not talking about what the contract might or might not allow the employer to do, I am talking common workplace standards (further to kayf’s comments), not to mention courtesy and believing in second chances;</p></li>
<li><p>the employer has already invested so much in the employee to this point, and there are literally just weeks left until the end of the employment contract, why terminate now and leave the “customers” (the resident students) and the remaining employees in a less safe and much more stressful situation? </p></li>
<li><p>in addition to kayf’s concerns about supervisors’ responsibilites, were all employees committing the same infractions treated similarly?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>or maybe you could just post a bunch of great stuff in all the other Northeastern threads so that this one falls to the bottom of the feed, because this forum isn’t for discussing anything but positive subjects (including only cold, hard facts, no other opinions or empathy needed).</p>
<p>TomSr- with all due respect… You seem invested in having any criticism toward the NEU admistration deflected as speculation and don’t want anyone asking questions. If it is so important to you, why don’t you call NEU and ask for a press release? Or at least a comment?</p>
<p>This is the first time I have heard RA’s doing security sweeps through other buildings. I normally associate RA’s with having responsibility for their floor and being available on their assigned night/weekend. This sounds like Northeastern was using them as security guards.</p>
<p>This points to a need for NEU to update their protocols. If an RA is responsible for making rounds a certain number of times, and swiping into a station in each building, then their compliance with that requirement should be monitored by their direct supervisor. If they are not meeting that requirement, they should be first given a warning, with the opportunity to do better. If they then fail to improve, they face termination. If they are not making rounds, and the supervisor is not doing his job of monitoring the RA, or coaching the RA toward improvement, then the supervisor should face termination for failure to do his job. </p>
<p>If the prorated cost for 5 weeks of housing is $1200, then that’s $240 of benefit for each week that they don’t do their job. When you consider that this is a tax-free benefit, it is worth more (how much would they have to earn before taxes to pay that $240 a week)?</p>
<p>I understand that there are obstacles to completing the rounds, but it is their job. If it is physically difficult to complete rounds due to weather conditions, that could be taken into consideration, but the need to study or sleep is not a valid excuse for missing rounds. Any job is going to cut into study time - if you need the study time, don’t accept the position!</p>
<p>I agree CTScoutsmom, there is a real need for protocol overhaul. I believe that the methodology employed for monitoring these duty rounds was seriously flawed (I posted a little bit in Parent Forum thread re: my updated info), and they were wrongfully accused of missing rounds in many instances. I also know stuff about the supervising authority that I will not post. The bottom line is I feel the RAs were wrongly terminated (and I think it’s a very strong case).</p>
<p>Do you think that certain of these posters would believe a Northeastern press release if one were issued? It would be dismissed as sugar coating if not ouright lies issued by the administration in an effort to cover up the truth.</p>
<p>I am not a parent of a NEU student, but I do think that examining records of 14 RAs for non-compliance with “rounds”, firing half for non-compliance, and then waiting for the results on the majority of them till next week is indicative of poor judgment by resident life. What do they intend to do next week when they get results on the other 174?</p>
<p>“Do you think that certain of these posters would believe a Northeastern press release if one were issued? It would be dismissed as sugar coating if not ouright lies issued by the administration in an effort to cover up the truth.” </p>
<p>TomSr- my comment was in response to your comment suggesting other posters call NEU and ask them… And from your reply to me above, I guess your original suggestion to have them call, would be just as futile, because NEU certainy isn’t going to admit to any wrong doing, so as not to open themselves to a wrongful termination lawsuit.</p>
<p>Kudo’s to the school paper, for saying that more transparency is needed, and Northeastern has significant room for improvement. Also, Northeastern seems more concerned that students not communicate with any newspapers than trying to improve.</p>