Two Community Assistants at UB were fired after attending a party at the South Lake Village Apartments over the Halloween weekend. Their actions were noted because of various violations at the party, including the presence of alcoholic beverages around minors and a capacity violation. Although the CAs should be punished for their irresponsible behavior, the university's decision to fire them goes too far.
The CAs were stripped of their positions at the University Residence Halls and Apartments. The URH&A directors are currently in the process of reviewing the decision.
It was irresponsible for the CAs to attend a party in violation of campus living rules. According to the University Apartments Handbook, "large group gatherings in excess of 15 people in a four-bedroom apartment are prohibited." This number was shattered, as there were approximately 50 to 70 people attending the party.
According to the residents hosting the party, a handful of the partygoers were underage. Though this number may appear trivial, the UAH clearly states, "in any area where tenants and/or guests are under the age of 21, no alcoholic beverages may be possessed or consumed."
As CAs, these two individuals should know that these charges are a violation of the on-campus apartments regulations. By attending parties, they are putting themselves in a situation that compromises their authoritative powers and some punishment is warranted.
However, university officials must also recognize that even though the CAs are authority figures, they are, at heart, college students.
The URH&A administrators cannot expect their Resident Advisors and Community Assistants to give up their social lives in order to dedicate themselves to their positions. Neither CA was hosting the party. They were both of legal age, had clean records and were not responsible for checking to see if minors were present. Their violations were minor and thus, a minor punishment should have been administered.
It also seems unfair that the on-campus apartments, havens for those who want to be treated as independent adults, have stricter alcohol rules than the dorms. Apartment residents are not allowed to have any alcohol present in the apartment if there is anyone underage in the residence, but in the dorms, "if all the residents of a student room are not of legal drinking age, those residents over 21 years of age may keep alcohol in the room," as stated by the Guide to Residence Hall Living.
On-campus apartment residents, who should have more freedom than dorm residents, should not get in trouble for drinking in the presence of a minor. As long as they are not serving the minor alcohol, there should not be a problem. URH&A administrators should recognize this and give both dorm and campus apartment residents equal rights.
The rights of the CAs also lack balance. If the atmosphere at the party was more volatile and the potential for danger was high, The Spectrum's stance of the situation would be quite different. The URH&A administration would be justified to fire the CAs if a student got sick or was killed. However, nothing so serious occurred. It appears that the URH&A directors fired the CAs solely because of their position with the university in order to set an example for the students.
The university needs to understand the CAs are human and should not be unfairly punished, even though they should be more aware of their actions because of their position with the university. All students need to have some fun one way or another, and should be punished accordingly when they fall out of line. Community service hours and fines are fair punishments, but firing the CAs is unjust when compared to the violation.
Photo: Courtesy of Laron Fomby
