420 Maynard Street, Ann Arbor, Mich. Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of the author. This must be noted in all reprints. Tuesday, June 8, 1971 News Phone: 764-0552 NIGHT EDITOR: ROSE SUE BERSTEIN Evil weed KO's snake in test, claims youthful herpetologist 'U' sex bias test IN THE FIRST CASE of its kind to come through the University's grievance procedures - the first of its kind, in fact, in the nation - the University has denied a female employe's request for a salary adjustment to compensate for what she charged was sex discrimina- tion. Research Associate Cheryl Clark filed a grievance in January charging that she was being paid less than a male employe with the same job title and responsibilities. In denying Clark's request, the University review committee said that "professional staff salaries are not determined on the basis of doing circumscribed, defined tasks" and are "based primarily on professional qualifi- cations, experience and anticipated performance." The committee concluded that the difference in salaries was not the result of sex discrimination. There were three members of the review committee - a representative of the Institute of Science and Tech- nology (IST), under which the Highway Safety Research Institute by which Clark is employed operates, J a m e s Thiry, manager of employe relations for the University, and a representative of the Commission on Women. The vote was two to one - with Thiry and the IST representative in the majority and with Jean Campbell of the Women's Commission dissenting from the opinion that Clark deserved neither a retroactive pay compensa- tion nor a salary increase. Back pay adjustment for salary inequities result- ing from sex discrimination is one of the provisions of agreement with the. Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) as part of the University's plan to end alleged sex discrimination. Although HEW has aproved the University plan in broad outlines, the specific goals and timetables have not yet been approved. CLARK'S CASE gains significance as the first oppor- A tunity the University has had to show its sincerity about enforcing its guidelines against sex discrimination. Judging from the Clark case, one must wonder how serious the University is about this aspect of the agree- ment, and how fair the review board procedure is in resolving cases such as these. Here is a case where a woman employe has clearly demonstrated that she performs the same job duties and holds the same title as a male employe who receives a salary $3,400 higher than hers. The treatment of Clark's case through the current channels of complaint bodes ill for the manner in which similar appeals for back pay adjustments will be treated in the future. Although a Women's Commission proposal for an alternate method for hearing such- cases has been ac- cepted, it is unclear whether this will make much dif- ference. Yet a women's representative has been named to supervise hearings for pay adjustments, among other duties, and if the commission and the representative are forceful and effective, it will certainly ease the diffi- culty of "proving" that a woman does deserve a salary adjustment. In any case. HEW should consider carefully the pos- sibility of not accepting the University's "goals and time- tables for affirmative action" until the University can guarantee an efficacious method for insuring fair and complete hearings of sex discrimination cases. OTHERWISE, any agreement may be but a farce, an official document that will enable the University to continue receiving federal research contracts while dis- criminating against women in clear violation of federal law. -ROSE SUE BERSTEIN Sumttter Eclitorial Staff STEVE KOPPMAN LARRY LEMPERT Co-Editor Co-Editor ROBERT CONROw ...................................... ..Books Editor JIM JUDKIS........... . ..... .... .... .... Photography Editor NIGHT EDITORS: Rose Sue Berstein. Mark Dillen, Jonathan Miller, Robert Schreiner, Geri Sprung ASSISTANT NIGHT EDITORS: Patricia E. Bauer, Anita Crone, Jim Irwin, Alan Lenhoff, Chris Parks Summer Sports Staff RICK CORNFELD .................................... ..Sports Editor SANDI GENIS ........... ....................... Associate sports Editor Summer Business Staff JIM STOREY..,..... . . .. .....Business Manager JANET ENGL ...........Displiy Advertising FRAN MYMAN ....... ... Classified Advertising BECKY VAN DYKE... .. ....... nCiruaition Department BILL ABBOTT.,-.......-:Ot ,,:...Gneri Offle Assistani. By JONATHAN MILLER A SIXTEEN YEAR-OLD herpetologist I know has made an interesting discovery. In what must be considered a major advancement in the knowledge of the complex inter-relationship between men, snakes and lizards, the young experimenter resolved a ques- tion which many of today's modern travellers may encounter on their trips to the marijuana-lush areas of Mexico and the southwest United States. "If chased by a viper," the remarkable young man recommends, "remember t h a t blowing marijuana smoke into its face has been demonstrated to cause VIPERS EAT LIZARDS - that is a well-known herpetological phenomenon. But, with the farsight- edneM -that can make a man great, our young hero looked at the situation from a different perspective. "If," he theorized, "the snake could, without any permanent side effects beyond residual hunger, be made temporarily incapable of exercising the. lethal fangs in the back of its mouth, then man need never again walk in fear of the viper." A viper, a lizard and a quantity of marijuana pro- vided the raw material which this particular herpe- tologist used for this particular unprecedented experi- ment, which should make fear of vipers obsolete among young and old alike. The viper used in the experiment, incidentally, had not been defanged, as the young scientist sincerely believed in making the experiment valid by ground- ing it in harsh realism. "STONING" THE VIPER was little problem be- yond keeping a safe distance from its mouth. In- deed, in many ways it was the most pleasant part of the experiment. As the clouds of narcotic smoke bil- lowed into the enclosure, the snakedbegan to exhibit strange behavorial traits. It waved its first couple of slender feet in wierd patterns in the sky. "Peeee- ooow," went the viper, according to my herpetologist buddy. Then, the lizard was put in the enclosure. Try as it might, the snake could not catch and kill the lizard- it merely banged its head on the glass walls of the experimental facility. "If it will work for a lizard, it will work for men too," says the scientist teen, a note of accomplishment in his voice. surprisingly, his achievement has been little recog- nized by the respectable academic community, thus proving that history repeats itself-the same fate hav- ing befallen Newton. THE PHILOSOPHICAL implications of the experi- ment are clear. The viper has always been one of man's enemies. Indeed, since the garden of Eden, men have sought to avoid vipers. It may be that factor alone which has caused me to hold so much admira- tion for the herpotologist. As Saint Patrick is best remembered for his role in ridding Ireland of snakes-and since his day no one has been harmed by a slippery reptile on the Emerald Isle-even sainthood could lie in, store for our young friend, the man who may extend the good work of Saint Patrick world wide. the snake to miss when making that final, fatal thrust to sink his poisonous fangs deep into your body." Herpetology is, of course, "that branch of zoology which treats of reptiles and amphibians," and as competition is so keen among young herpetologists, the constant striving to be in the forefront of ad- vanced behavioral research causes some young in- ventors to resort to extraordinary laboratory tech- niques - even at the risk of their own health. Letters to The Daily _i Daily case I-j401