Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Man robbed at Tallmadge Avenue eatery
Another winter punch heading toward Ohio
Four teens restrain man, take items from his Akron home
Complaints against officer keep coming
Police: Ohio girl dies after fall into snow bank
Region makes way for latest batch of snow; cancellations rise
Cuyahoga Falls residents come home to find burning couch on balcony
Blogs:
First Bell - On Education:
No City of Akron basketball tonight
Pets:
Pet telethon re-airs
The Heldenfiles:
Chipmunks "Squeakquel" on DVD/BD March 30
Akron Zips:
Late surge gives Zips ugly road win
Tribe Matters:
Blogmail response on Hafner
Cleveland Browns:
Stallworth's contract terminated
Balanced Ledger:
QB in Browns future: another mock draft
Kent State Sports:
KSU Notes – February 9
Cleveland Cavaliers:
NBA Power Rankings from Around the Internet
Buckeye Blogging:
Buckeyes grab 18 players on signing day
Varsity Letters:
Garfield at Buchtel basketball
All Da King's Men:
Palin At The Tea Party Convention
Blog of Mass Destruction:
Republican Pre-Conditions
Akron Law Café:
Law, Love and Chocolate
Car Chase:
Collector Car Hobby Loses One of the Best—Jim Roll
Let's Talk Real Estate:
Decisions Decisions: Credit Cards or Your Mortgage?
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Loucile is looking for a Lake Erie getaway in June for three kids, ages 1, 3, and 5.
Sound Check:
Talk of the Town – Top entertainment picks for the weekend
HRLite House:
OFCCP Report
Akron Gamer:
Makers of 'Castle Crashers' unveil 'BattleBlock Theater'
See Jane Style:
Do IT this week: Layering
By Carol Biliczky
Beacon Journal staff writer
POSTED: 08:20 p.m. EDT, Oct 28, 2009
The American Civil Liberties Union on Wednesday criticized a new University of Akron policy that could require new employees to provide DNA samples.
ACLU spokesman Mike Brickner said his office ''is not aware of any employer nationally that requires employees to give DNA samples. It's just unheard of.''
He also said the UA policy violates a federal law that will be effective Nov. 21 that prohibits employers from requiring employees to give DNA samples.
A UA spokeswoman said the university is committed to providing a safe environment but has not tested any applicants since the policy took effect Aug. 12.
''Nor do we have plans to do so in the future. The university is merely reserving the right,'' spokeswoman Laura Massie said.
The policy UA trustees approved requires applicants to undergo criminal background checks at the state and possibly federal levels and to provide fingerprints and, at the university's discretion, possibly DNA samples.
The policy does not indicate what the DNA sample would be. Massie said the university would decide what kind of DNA test to conduct ''if and when'' it decides to go ahead.
In a written statement, Christine Link, executive director of the Ohio ACLU, said employers had a right to require background checks ''but they are not entitled to our most private, personal genetic information.''
The UA policy authorizes university police to conduct background checks and report findings to the manager of employment services and the hiring department.
Information is to be ''kept in the confidential personnel file of the employee,'' according to the policy. ''For those employees not hired, the information will be kept in a secure file in Employment Services.''
The policy does not indicate the kinds of cases in which DNA samples could be required, ''which could open the door to unfair profiling,'' the ACLU said.
Previous convictions do not automatically disqualify applicants from a UA job. The university would consider the nature of the offense, the time since the conviction or completion of the sentence and the nature of the job being sought in deciding whether to repeal its offer.
Background checks are to be conducted after applicants have verbally accepted a job offer but before they start work. The $27 fee for an Ohio check and $29 for a federal one is charged to the the hiring department.
The ACLU has no immediate plans to sue UA over the policy and hopes the university would repeal it on its own, Brickner said.
Carol Biliczky can be reached at 330-996-3729 or cbiliczky@thebeaconjournal.com.
The American Civil Liberties Union on Wednesday criticized a new University of Akron policy that could require new employees to provide DNA samples.
ACLU spokesman Mike Brickner said his office ''is not aware of any employer nationally that requires employees to give DNA samples. It's just unheard of.''
He also said the UA policy violates a federal law that will be effective Nov. 21 that prohibits employers from requiring employees to give DNA samples.
A UA spokeswoman said the university is committed to providing a safe environment but has not tested any applicants since the policy took effect Aug. 12.
''Nor do we have plans to do so in the future. The university is merely reserving the right,'' spokeswoman Laura Massie said.
The policy UA trustees approved requires applicants to undergo criminal background checks at the state and possibly federal levels and to provide fingerprints and, at the university's discretion, possibly DNA samples.
The policy does not indicate what the DNA sample would be. Massie said the university would decide what kind of DNA test to conduct ''if and when'' it decides to go ahead.
In a written statement, Christine Link, executive director of the Ohio ACLU, said employers had a right to require background checks ''but they are not entitled to our most private, personal genetic information.''
The UA policy authorizes university police to conduct background checks and report findings to the manager of employment services and the hiring department.
Information is to be ''kept in the confidential personnel file of the employee,'' according to the policy. ''For those employees not hired, the information will be kept in a secure file in Employment Services.''
The policy does not indicate the kinds of cases in which DNA samples could be required, ''which could open the door to unfair profiling,'' the ACLU said.
Previous convictions do not automatically disqualify applicants from a UA job. The university would consider the nature of the offense, the time since the conviction or completion of the sentence and the nature of the job being sought in deciding whether to repeal its offer.
Background checks are to be conducted after applicants have verbally accepted a job offer but before they start work. The $27 fee for an Ohio check and $29 for a federal one is charged to the the hiring department.
The ACLU has no immediate plans to sue UA over the policy and hopes the university would repeal it on its own, Brickner said.
Carol Biliczky can be reached at 330-996-3729 or cbiliczky@thebeaconjournal.com.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
Macedonia, Oh
Posted 09:25 PM, 10/28/2009
What the .u.k is wrong with The University of Akron and what type of quack legal advice are they being given? (Ted Mallo needs to get the boot yesterday) Background checks and finger prints are perfectly acceptable but reserving a "right" that the university clearly doesn't have is totally irresponsible.
What next...? Zippy wears a swastika?
Akron, OH
Posted 09:39 PM, 10/28/2009
@Jason12, it appears until November 12th that is was not illegal.
Akron, OH
Posted 09:43 PM, 10/28/2009
The article says that the ACLU "is not aware of any employer nationally that requires employees to give DNA samples."
There is at least one group - baseball. It is done by a US employer but outside the US.
See: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/22/sports/baseball/22dna.html
Tallmadge, OH
Posted 11:54 PM, 10/28/2009
My DNA is all over the UA campus.
Akron, Oh
Posted 12:43 AM, 10/29/2009
I agree with the observation that UA's longtime general counsel, Ted Mallo, needs to be put out to pasture. Pursuant to state law, state universities have carte blanche to make whatever rules they want. Their rulemaking authority (which has the force of law) is not subject to prior notice or public comment. If Ohio's state universities were subject to such requirements--as all virtually all other state agencies--this rule never would have been passed. Something else that is disturbing is that the UA Board of Trustees rubber stamped this policy, despite the prevalence of attorneys on the Board.
Many of the problems at UA stem from the culture of the General Counsel's Office. This culture needs to change!
Akron, Oh
Posted 12:45 AM, 10/29/2009
Visit http://www.newfacultymajority.info for more information about the abuse of adjunct & contingent faculty at The University of Akron and elsewhere. It's not enough that universities fail to pay adjuncts and part-time professors a living wage and that they deny adjuncts access to affordable health insurance, now they want to violate the sanctity of our bodies by requiring a sample of our DNA!
Enough is enough!
Akron, oh
Posted 07:16 AM, 10/29/2009
DNA and finger prints. The same reason for both. Identify crooks. So ACLU stuff it. Saftey first for the students and the citizens.
Akron, Oh
Posted 07:23 AM, 10/29/2009
Nothing, nothing surprises me now about the UA senior administration. Let's see what will be next? Loyalty oaths? AIDS testing? Abolition of tenure? Ask most professors what they think about the Duce Proenza and his right wing gang on the Board of Trustees. He accepts enormous salary increases while freezing those of professors and employees. Not only freezing them but holding them down in comparison with other Ohio universities... while he enriches himself. UA is a scandal.
Akron, OH
Posted 09:43 AM, 10/29/2009
@AkronAdjunct, they have not required anything.
Macedonia, Oh
Posted 10:06 AM, 10/29/2009
They reserve the right to require. Quit mincing words and playing semantics, GSMR.
'"The university is merely reserving the right,'' spokeswoman Laura Massie said.'
Ok, I've decided to MERELY reserve the right to puch your lights out. Mind you now, I'm not punching your lights out. I'm merely reserving the right. Can't you see the difference? It's as clear as mud as it is intended to be.
Akron, OH
Posted 10:29 AM, 10/29/2009
@Jason12, not semantics. There is a clear difference between "requiring" and "reserving the right".
If you cannot see the difference, than I can have you arrested for assault now, before you even take any actions.
barberton, oh
Posted 11:13 AM, 10/29/2009
the leader of the faculty senate (and Law Professor), William Rich, never heard of this and is deeply troubled by the university's assumption it is acceptable.
AKRON, OH
Posted 11:49 AM, 10/29/2009
Akron u may have DNA on Donny boy.that could be the reason he keep giving THEM ALL OF AKRON LAND FOR A DOLLAR OR LESS.Akron debt will stand after the 500 million for sewers 1.410 billion dollars.
Norton, Oh
Posted 12:19 PM, 10/29/2009
The real question is WHY do they want DNA? If you are arrested (not even convicted), your fingerprints are on a national database. Makes one wonder what their hidden agenda is for the use of someone's DNA.
uniontown, oh
Posted 12:41 PM, 10/29/2009
Its for a national DNA data base. This is the best and cleanest way to solve cold cases and sexual assault cases. Also you might want to consider putting your childrens DNA information into this system. Might save them some day.
ProChoice, OH
Posted 07:16 AM, 10/30/2009
What? Background checks are one thing, DNA is for CRIMINALS! This is ridiculous & NO ONE should put their kids fingerprints or DNA in any NATIONAL database b/c it will be there forever! Go ACLU, sue away!
Lefty Lemmingville, Oh
Posted 06:56 PM, 11/01/2009
ACLU = Aging Communist Leftover Union.
Macedonia, Oh
Posted 04:34 PM, 11/02/2009
@GSMR - It is too semantics. Your argument is bogus hair splitting, pedantic and intellectually dishonest. It purposefully overlooks the spirit of my analogy. Are you always this desperately oppositional and malcontented? I don't have the right to reserve the right to punch someone and I don't have the right to punch someone...little difference.
If UA wants to defend the right to take DNA from a person, then it should at least do so with integrity and not play mind games.
Akron, OH
Posted 03:05 PM, 11/29/2009
@Jason12, if you do not know know the difference between "requiring" and "reserving the right", I would question all the money you have spent on your education.
