Gerald D. Biby
And
The University of Nebraska
Lincoln, NE
1999
Is The Price for Integrity too High?
The Corn Card Incident
Every now and then a few stalwart individuals, have provided history with dramatic moments: a war was stopped, a tyrant was overthrown, an enslaved people won their freedom, or a less noteworthy victory was gained. It is to these individuals, even when under the overwhelming pressure to conform have summoned the integrity to dissent, ignoring the Machiavellian advice to leave the end unquestioned and the means unexamined, that this chronicle is dedicated.
Quotes
About 500 years ago modern political thinking began. Its enticing surface was the idea of "realism." Its center was the idea that with a worthwhile end, one could justify any means. Its spokesman was Nicolo Machiavelli.
In the year 1498 Nicolo Machiavelli became adviser on foreign and military affairs to the government of Florence, one of the great Italian cities of that time. After fourteen years of service, a change of government led to his dismissal, and he spent the rest of his life in exile in the countryside outside of Florence. During that time he wrote, among other things, a little book called The Prince, which became the world's most famous hand book of political wisdom for governments and their advisers. Machiavelli believed that men respect power, but they will take advantage of kindness. He believed that when given the opportunity one must destroy completely, because if one does not he will certainly be destroyed. His views appear to convey the contemporary frailness of ethics and integrity of many organizations.
For some organizations, Machiavellianism dominates, but the courage
of a small number of stalwart individuals hint that some day the populace
will no longer accept this kind of "realism." Machiavelli himself might
have mused at this proposition, and said, "You're wasting your time. Nothing
will change. It's human nature."
My Observations on Dealing with a University
My hope to others that decide to resist the recognize the ultimate cost for having the integrity to dissent is very high. With the dissent comes isolation and scorn frequently by the very people that you have viewed as professional colleagues. The organization you work for will marshal all its strength to "circle the wagons" around the people responsible for the focus of your dissent, and with a pure Machiavellian purpose will attempt to destroy you professionally and personally.
There will be periodic times, that you will question if it is worth it to continue to resist the pressure to conform. You will probably only receive token support, even from those people who know you are right in your dissent. In the end, my experience (so far) suggests that potential supporters will decide not to "make any waves." This will leave you along, or almost alone in your dissent.
Next, the organization will transfer or dismiss you, believing that once that happens, its internal "harmony" will begin to be restored. The organization's belief is based upon a single, simple premise, if you are unemployed, you need to eat and you cannot attack them if you are looking for work and even if you have the stamina to continue your dissent, a time will come when you "give up."
Working within an organization for me has been unsuccessful. After more than 10 months of "going through channels" and "following policies and procedures" it has been my experience that this allowed the people who are the focus of my dissent to have the time to create an image of both my cause and me personally as being "not true" and me as "unreliable and untruthful."
My ultimate observation is that if you are dealing with a situation that involves one or more people in a position of authority, that given time, they can exert absolute power over the outcome of your dissent. If it is in their "best interest" your dissent will be supported, however, if it challenges their decisions, actions or activities, your work within the organization will be unsuccessful. This has been my discovery - it may not be yours. I believed that it would be in the best interest of the organization to solve its problems internally and not with the "dirty laundry" being aired in public. At this point, I now recognize that in my situation, the organization was oblivious to whether it was settled internally or in the media or courts.
Therefore, it appears that visibility from the public and media may be able to be focused on what is happening at the University of Nebraska.
Accordingly, the University of Nebraska is directed to consider all the information that is included in the grievance file June 21, 1999 (or there about) against Dr. Donald Helmuth to be in the public domain. As claimant of the grievance against Dr. Helmuth I have the right to remove that information from being confidential . The information in the public domain is "everything"and is not limited. All documents I submitted, audio tapes, video tapes and recorded testimony is NO LONGER CONFIDENTIAL. This also includes the grievance appeals committee report that was filed on October 11, 1999.
And the University of Nebraska is directed to consider all the information that is included in the grievance file November 24, 1999 (or there about) against Dr. Darrell Nelson to be in the public domain. As claimant of the grievance against Dr. Nelson I have the right to remove that information from being confidential. All the information I submitted in my grievance against Dr. Donald Hemuth is hereby annexed as documentation and support for this grievance against Dr. Nelson. The information in the public domain is "everything"and is not limited. All documents I submitted, audio tapes, video tapes and recorded testimony is NO LONGER CONFIDENTIAL.
Grievance Against Dr. Donald Helmuth Filed June 23, 1999
