COLUMN: Penn's Finest?

From Dan Schorr's "Behind Enemy Lines," Fall '93 From Dan Schorr's "Behind Enemy Lines," Fall '93From that original tour of Penn to the first night out in the streets of West Philadelphia to the arguments with your parents to allow you to live off campus, there's one subject at the University that never fails to arise: security. Some say that they're assigned to protect all the wrong places. Some say that there's not enough of them. Well, good news! For the first time in three years, Penn's employment office is taking applications for patrol officers. Nine people will be added to the security force, and, it was recently revealed, the University is considering some interesting criteria for the candidates. If you were hiring new officers, what characteristics would you focus on? If you say experience and ability, you're partly correct. However, you're neglecting the other factors that the University deems significant in the hunt for new security officers: their sex and their skin. Although they say that "affirmative action" will not be utilized, the University is actively recruiting minorities and women through, among other methods, advertising in newspapers read by such groups. It could be argued that what gender or racial group one belongs to is irrelevant when the University is in need of police assistance. If you're being mugged, how important is your savior's demographic make-up? But the University is concerned about more than the applicants' qualifications. They have stated that they would like to "assure a diversity in the pool of candidates." At a time when crime is rising faster than the powers at Penn are killing the Revlon Center, can we afford not to concentrate every resource on hiring the nine most excellent candidates? The anticipated response to this statement, of course, is, "Are you saying that women and minorities are less 'excellent' officers?" After placing the recruitment of women and minorities in conflict with searching for ability, one might perceive a discriminatory attitude towards these groups. However, by objecting to such an emphasis, one does not necessarily imply that women and minorities are less qualified. When one biases the makeup of your candidate pool in any way, one opens up the possibility of excluding candidates that may be more qualified than those selected. I might lobby for the University to hire officers who are libertarians. Currently, I am not aware of a single member of the Penn force that identifies with this philosophy. I can say, "No, I'm not talking affirmative action, I just want you to recruit more libertarians. Maybe you can advertise in libertarian magazines." "But we're looking for the best security officers," the University would respond. "Political philosophy is irrelevant. We're going to focus solely on ability." "Are you saying that, by looking for libertarians, you're sacrificing quality? Do you think they're inferior?" But many would argue that this analogy fails, since the race and sex of officers are significant characteristics that make students feel more accepted by the University. Well, if we're hiring officers that will help people feel more comfortable, why not continue to pursue this goal? Next time you call the police, maybe you'll hear: "You have reached the sensitive, diverse, demographically-correct headquarters of the University of Pennsylvania Police. Please indicate what type of officer you feel most secure with." "For a white cop, press one. For a black cop, press two. For an Asian cop, press three. For a Latino cop, press four. If you are bicultural or do not identify with one of these races, please hold, and an operator will be with you faster than you can say 'multicultural.'" And in a few months, just as a spouse speaks to his or her partner before going to market, the University will say to Chief Kuprevich, "We're going out to hire more officers, what do you need?" "Well, we're low on Eastern Europeans," he might respond. "And we're fresh out of Australians." "Okay, we'll try to recruit some. What newspapers do Eastern Europeans read, anyway?" When individuals are interviewed and scrutinized for these positions, it's scary that anything but their ability to help make our environment safer might be considered. We can have nine minority women or nine white men, and if lives are saved, security is enhanced, and property is protected as best as humanly possible, the University has done its job. Martin Luther King, Jr., in the famous speech during the March on Washington, proclaimed, "I dream of a day that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." But here at Penn, instead of focusing solely on the ability to promote safety, the University wants to turn the police force into a United Nations, in which each officer can represent his constituency in the University community. Instead of working to promote accurate representation, maybe those looking for new officers should devote their undivided financial, physical, and intellectual concentration on making our campus as safe as possible. How do you avoid the appearance of favoritism and discrimination within the police department? A color-blind and sexless recruitment and selection process might be a good start. Dan Schorr is a junior English major from Valley Stream, New York. Behind Enemy Lines appeared alternate Fridays.