More Warren Paving Trough Feeding... - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: May 12, 2005

More Warren Paving Trough Feeding...

Date: May 12, 2005

You get what you pay for. Or so I'm told.

Date: May 12, 2005

here's the memo. yawn.

-----

A MESSAGE FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI PHYSICAL PLANT

Beginning May 16 or 17, 2005, the paving project will continue. You can
expect some delays with road and parking lot closures at Southern Ave. and
Arthell Kelly Hall, Montague Blvd. between Sunset and 31st Ave., Pearl St.
between Sunset and 31st Ave., and Bennett Alley and West Memorial Drive.
Signage will be in place to help inform the driving public to these delays
and closures. Roads will be re-opened as they are completed.

Bennett Alley and West Memorial will be reconfigured into a pedestrian plaza,
similar to the area from The Hub to Cook Library. The existing roadways will
be removed and replaced with a brick paver walkway, closing them to traffic
and parking. This project will begin the week of May 16th, with a completion
goal of the end of August.

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement project is proceeding along Sunset
Dr. and the Payne Center. During this current phase, no road or parking lot
closures are anticipated, and delays will be minimal due to equipment and
product delivery.

Date: May 12, 2005

Presumably,whoever is doing this work obtained the job by competitive bidding.In other words,they met the standards and offered the best price to the taxpayers of the state.Unless they were a minority firm in which case the taxpayers will get to pay more for the same work in order to be politically correct. This affirmative action-endorsed by the faculty at USM-is one of many reasons why the professors are not very well thought of by the working people of the community.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Working Man
" . . . .Unless they were a minority firm in which case the taxpayers will get to pay more for the same work in order to be politically correct. This affirmative action-endorsed by the faculty at USM-is one of many reasons why the professors are not very well thought of by the working people of the community. "

Tell me, Working Man, has a minority vendor ever been awarded a job at USM when more qualified non- minority bidders were competing for the same work?

Date: May 12, 2005

It's hard for small business to get state contract work, and a project like this would take a certain amount of equipment and manpower that the guy who paves your driveway wouldn't have.

I have a little first hand experience with state contracts. My stb-ex was never able to bid low enough to install certain equipment at Little Black Creek Water Park, partly because he refused to use cheapo stuff. But when the cheapo stuff broke down, he was always the guy who got called out in the middle of the night to come fix it.

This is a peripheral issue. Unless somebody has evidence of actual wrongdoing, we've got bigger fish to fry.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Working Man
"Presumably,whoever is doing this work obtained the job by competitive bidding.In other words,they met the standards and offered the best price to the taxpayers of the state.Unless they were a minority firm in which case the taxpayers will get to pay more for the same work in order to be politically correct. This affirmative action-endorsed by the faculty at USM-is one of many reasons why the professors are not very well thought of by the working people of the community. "

I'm confused Working Man. Isn’t affirmative action now part of the law of the land? Are you suggesting faculty and USM should break the law? Well, you can type all you want, but I'm not going to read your anti-USA propaganda and your downgrading this fine country of ours. If you don't like the laws then leave the USA. Don't stay here, benefit from this fine land, and obey only the laws you like. How un-American!!

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Citizen
" I'm confused Working Man. Isn’t affirmative action now part of the law of the land? Are you suggesting faculty and USM should break the law? Well, you can type all you want, but I'm not going to read your anti-USA propaganda and your downgrading this fine country of ours. If you don't like the laws then leave the USA. Don't stay here, benefit from this fine land, and obey only the laws you like. How un-American!! "

If that's the best defense you can make for affirmative action,you need to go back to school.Segregation was once part of "the law of the land" . We need to learn to look past the color of the skin.I know I'd never want someone to give me a job at a higher cost to my fellow citizens because of the color of my skin. I hope that clears up your confusion.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Working Man
"If that's the best defense you can make for affirmative action,you need to go back to school.Segregation was once part of "the law of the land" . We need to learn to look past the color of the skin.I know I'd never want someone to give me a job at a higher cost to my fellow citizens because of the color of my skin. I hope that clears up your confusion. "

No it didn't clear up the confusion. Why, because you never answered the questions I asked. I see from what you wrote you are against affirmative action. No need to communicate that again. That is clear. So what should USM or the faculty do when some people don't like some laws? Your never answered. Are you suggesting we disobey the laws? You never answered.

Concerning your first statement, I didn't defend affirmative action. Rather I pointed out it was the law and asked if you were suggesting we break the law. You never answered.

Sorry if I raised your blood pressure. But now I'm sure I have a hint that you are against affirmative action, but I can't determine if you want USM to break that law to bring it down like Segregation was brought down.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Working Man
"If that's the best defense you can make for affirmative action,you need to go back to school. Segregation was once part of "the law of the land" . We need to learn to look past the color of the skin. I know I'd never want someone to give me a job at a higher cost to my fellow citizens because of the color of my skin. "

Working Man, so what do you want us to do when the law dictates affirmative action . . . . . Protest? Burn our draft cards? Move to Canada? Fall over in front of a heavy duty steamroller? Go to a rock festival? You said that the affirmative action policy is why USM faculty members are not very well thought of by members of the community. It sounds to me like you have an axe to grind with the federal government that established the principle of affirmative action . . . . . not with USM faculty members. If you object to affirmative action, contact your congressperson.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Redneck, White Socks, and Blue Ribbon Beer
"Working Man, so what do you want us to do when the law dictates affirmative action . . . . . Protest? Burn our draft cards? Move to Canada? Fall over in front of a heavy duty steamroller? Go to a rock festival? You said that the affirmative action policy is why USM faculty members are not very well thought of by members of the community. It sounds to me like you have an axe to grind with the federal government that established the principle of affirmative action . . . . . not with USM faculty members. If you object to affirmative action, contact your congressperson. "

Please correct me if I'm wrong.Did not the Faculty Senate choose to fund an Affirmative Action officer instead of an extra academic slot when offered the option by Thames? Does not the home page of this web site include an endorsement of affirmative action? This is a strong endorsement by the faculty of preferences based on skin color. If you want to defend those principles fine.In these particular cases,the choices were made by the faculty.

Date: May 12, 2005

I'm not sure I see the connection between affirmative action in the workplace (for which you have an AA officer) and affirmative action in granting contracts. I'm a middle aged white female, and I had occasion to use the AA officer one time when I was a federal employee, and it was very effective in resolving my situation.
One of the real problems with AA in contract granting is that white owned firms will get a minority partner so they can bid as a minority firm, gaming the system so to speak.

Date: May 12, 2005

For contracts should the conversation center around set asides vs affirmative action?

Big difference.

Date: May 12, 2005

It doesn't matter who gets the contract. The point is that the projects themselves are a foolish waste of resources -- banners, Victorian lighting, removing brick partition walls and putting them up again (take a look at what's going on with the plaza between Cook and McCain), and on and on. The crews have been pouring concrete at the entrance to the Payne Center/sports parking lot for nearly two weeks, setting a foundation for God knows what SFT has in mind next. Locals are making a fortune off these unnecessary projects -- and they know it.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Working Man
"Please correct me if I'm wrong.Did not the Faculty Senate choose to fund an Affirmative Action officer instead of an extra academic slot when offered the option by Thames? Does not the home page of this web site include an endorsement of affirmative action? This is a strong endorsement by the faculty of preferences based on skin color. If you want to defend those principles fine.In these particular cases,the choices were made by the faculty. "

The Faculty Senate advised SFT against removing the Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employment officer and giving the work to someone inside Human Resources. He took the Senate's advice on this. (The one time I can recall that shared governance was used.) The Senate gave this advice because it considered it a very important office for ALL employees, as LVN can testify.

The only connection between AA/EOE and the construction contracts you are concerned about appear to be the words, "Affirmative Action". I consider it a stretch to blame the faculty for something they had no connection with just because the words are the same. But go ahead and bash the faculty. They seem to get blamed for everything wrong in Hattiesburg these days.

Date: May 12, 2005

it is only shared goverance when you get your way

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: ~?~
"it is only shared goverance when you get your way "

Wrong "~?~". This is SFT's propaganda. By definition "shared governance" is when you ask for input BEFORE you make the decision. SFT supporters keep saying, "Faculty want to run the university". That is not true and never was true. Faculty want input BEFORE decisions are made. SFT is afraid that the faculty arguments are stronger than his own and he doesn't want to lose a debate. He and his administration make decisions without input and it is up to faculty (or the Commissioner) to correct the mistakes and clean up the mess made.

Date: May 12, 2005

I believe all of the "Campus Types" that are unemployable in the outside world question someone winning a low bid on an contractual agreement with USM. Why are they opposed to SFT? Surely a reason must come forth from this group. Send them in to the "real world " to get a job. The cannot survive!!!

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: JoJo
"I believe all of the "Campus Types" that are unemployable in the outside world question someone winning a low bid on an contractual agreement with USM. Why are they opposed to SFT? Surely a reason must come forth from this group. Send them in to the "real world " to get a job. The cannot survive!!!"

Hi JoJo. I can't believe you posted the above. Wasn't it last week that it was established you had a "bad" experience with a prof? After further explanation it appeared the experience wasn't really "bad" but rather a "learning" experience for you where you were taught that all opinions are not equal. Opinions backed by evidence and reason are much more valuable than mere beliefs was something you were being taught. Why do you still attack academics and the educated? You know very well the reasons faculty and others oppose SFT. People complain about all of the letters in the papers about this. So why do you ask, "Why are they opposed to SFT?"

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: JoJo
"I believe all of the "Campus Types" that are unemployable in the outside world question someone winning a low bid on an contractual agreement with USM. Why are they opposed to SFT? Surely a reason must come forth from this group. Send them in to the "real world " to get a job. The cannot survive!!!"

Send Shelby into the "Real World"! Do you think that s-o-b would survive in a climate where he could no longer use his affiliation with a publically-funded non-profit institution (aka the university) to secure government pork dollars? Not on your life. Taxpayers funded most of his research, his lab, his research assistants, his patents, and on down the line. Wanta talk "free market"? Shelby has enjoyed the socialism of taxpayer funding his entire career.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: JoJo
" Send them in to the "real world " to get a job. The cannot survive!!!"

Total B.S. Wonder what JJ does for a living? In fact, boyo, a great many of your hated professors have had "real" jobs in the "real" world. That's how they got through school.

I liked the poster on another thread who talked about the "reality" of jobs like law, medicine, the clergy and other professional jobs. Why is the work of a doctor "real" but the biochemistry professor's work "unreal"?(that would be one of the professors who trained the doctor)

Interesting to see if JJ ever actually answers a question, or just shows up to fling garbage around as usual.

Date: May 12, 2005

My prediction is that you are going to see this thread strafed by trolls. Keep the thread on point talking about potential relationships between the administration and contractors. You've found a sore (or otherwise) spot.

Keep up the good work and ignore the trolls.

P.S. Check out how fast some of the cool new lightpoles are deteriorating in our MS weather. Guess we can look for the potholes next spring. Hard to do quality when you are working against an unknown deadline (SFTs demise).

Date: May 13, 2005

This thread started with an incorrect assumption about Warren getting the job because of his relationship with SFT. When the "faculty types' are proven wrong the head goes deep in the sand. Go figure!!

Date: May 13, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: JoJo
"This thread started with an incorrect assumption about Warren getting the job because of his relationship with SFT. When the "faculty types' are proven wrong the head goes deep in the sand. Go figure!!"

How were faculty proven wrong? There always remains doubt when people "who have a relationship" get a "state job [contract]" from someone, which is why we have nepotism/conflict-of-interest rules/laws in the first place. Aubrey Patterson ran into a firestorm when Barbour first nominated him for the IHL Board because his bank held the accounts of public universities in the state. The argument was that his bank needed to relinquish that business with the state, even though his bank may have first gotten the accounts "fair and square."

Date: May 13, 2005

That is a far reach for an analogy. Warren is a private businessman that bid on a job. You did not complain when he gave thousands of dollars to the USM Foundation or went to Jackson to lobby the Legislature to fund salaries for the Profs.

Date: May 13, 2005

So if you hold a big closed door meeting in honor of the exalted leader and then you "bid" for bidness I guess it is only logic that says you will certainly get the fair and square contract to make money off the state regime.

Date: May 13, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: JoJo
"This thread started with an incorrect assumption about Warren getting the job because of his relationship with SFT."

Jo Jo, this thread started out with no such assumption. As is the case with many of your assumptions, that is a figment of your imagination. Your contuing incorrect ASSsumptions are making you appear to be an ASS.

Date: May 13, 2005

the thread did begin with the assumption that warren paving got the contract. the e-mail i posted never indicated who was doing the paving.

Date: May 13, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"the thread did begin with the assumption that warren paving got the contract. the e-mail i posted never indicated who was doing the paving. "

SCM - Jo Jo said more than that. Here is what Jo Jo said: "This thread started with an incorrect assumption about Warren getting the job because of his relationship with SFT." This thread began with no such assumption about any relationship.

Date: May 13, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Thread
"SCM - Jo Jo said more than that. Here is what Jo Jo said: "This thread started with an incorrect assumption about Warren getting the job because of his relationship with SFT." This thread began with no such assumption about any relationship."

SCM - You are correct in that the email you posted did not say who is doing the paving. I was referring to the first post on this thread which said nothing about any relationship. Jo Jo seems confused as usual. It is Jo Jo who is making unfounded assumptions.