Recent events around the country have brought me to review my statements on affirmative action, including my 1985 letter to the deans. The points I made then are, it seems to me, still valid. They still reflect my own views; they are no less appropriate in light of this past year's developments in the courts; and they still represent sound policy for the university.

At this time, it is appropriate, in my judgment, to review the core of that 1985 letter to the deans and to reinforce the importance of those concepts for UB. The following are pertinent excerpts from that letter.

Affirmative action in faculty and staff recruitment has been university policy for many years, yet we have achieved less than fully satisfactory results in realizing a faculty and professional staff which includes substantial representation of minorities and women. That we have not done better does not indicate that we have lacked commitment, since there are many factors affecting the results of our affirmative action recruiting efforts. There is, however, some reason to believe that the academic community is at least somewhat ambivalent regarding the concept of affirmative action.

We are, in the main, a community which holds particularly meritocratic values about appointment to and advancement in the faculty and professional ranks. Those meritocratic values are a strength of the institution, and they are fully consistent with a commitment to equal opportunity in employment. That concept requires commitment to the proposition that every applicant for a position must be evaluated on the basis of his or her academic and professional merits and attainments, without prejudice as to his or her race, creed, ethnic origin or gender. I honestly believe that all members of the academy must accept the equal opportunity norm, else they betray the ideals of the academy. Moreover, I believe that this norm is broadly and well nigh universally embraced on this campus. But the concept of affirmative action goes beyond the principle of equal opportunity.

Affirmative action recruitment means that extra steps will be taken to seek out candidates from groups whose members are underrepresented in the academy. Moreover, affirmative action implies and requires that in making the final choice for a position, extra and special consideration will be given to candidates from underrepresented groups who have emerged in the search.

That extra consideration should take into account the fact of the candidate's status as a member of an underrepresented group. That fact should be treated as a significant factor among the several factors weighed in evaluating a candidate's qualifications, achievement and potential for contribution to the unit, its programs and its discipline or profession. Most of those factors are difficult to measure and quantify in determining the balance of advantage between one candidate and another. In making that determination, however, if the weight of other factors is equal or close to equal between leading candidates, the affirmative action factor should tip the balance in favor of the minority or woman candidate.

It is this aspect of the affirmative action concept which is most troublesome to many members of the academy. The concept seems to elevate characteristics which may appear unrelated to merit, e.g., race, ethnicity, gender, to the level of criteria by which choices are made or influenced in the appointment process. In other words, affirmative action, unlike equal opportunity, seems to run counter to the meritocratic values of the academy. If that be true, then what is the defense for affirmative action in the academy? There are, I think, significant benefits that accrue to this institution as a result of affirmative action.

The first of these benefits relates to the fact that, as a public institution we must, and gladly do, serve a student body which is broadly representative of the society, in terms of race, ethnicity and gender, among other characteristics. It is argued, and I believe validly so, that students from underrepresented groups need and deserve good role models from their own groups among the faculty and staff who serve them. It is argued, as well, that the presence of such role models enhances the total intellectual and personal growth of these students, and thus contributes to the educational mission of the university. I believe this argument is valid, but it has been stated more fully and effectively by others, so I will not pursue it further.

A second reason for affirmative action is that persons from underrepresented groups bring a special perspective to scholarship, teaching and creative activity. There is a feminist, an African American, an Hispanic perspective which informs scholarship, particularly in the humanities, social sciences and arts. If we lose these perspectives, our students will be educated in ways which do not adequately reflect the full range of human intellect and vision. I find this argument valid and believe that it is an especially important reason for affirmative action appointments.

Finally, what is for me the most important argument for affirmative action in the academy derives from the social, cultural and historical milieu of American higher education. As enlightened and liberated as we are in this university, we are nevertheless a product of our society. Less than thirty years ago, that society countenanced de jure segregation of the races, and de facto segregation still persists. Less than fifty years ago, blacks, jews, asians, other minorities, and women had limited or no access to prestigious universities and colleges, and this situation still persists in many significant institutions outside the academy. Less than seventy years ago, women were denied the vote in this country, and full equality for women is yet to be achieved.

In sum, we are not very far removed from a time when our larger society was not committed even to the concept of equal opportunity. In the academy, we have moved very close to full adoption of that ideal, but I believe that we must work assiduously to overcome any residual, perhaps not conscious, effects our national history may still have on our judgments regarding appointments. Affirmative action-that is, the commitment to go an extra step, to give special consideration to the factors of race, ethnicity and gender-helps to assure that in our appointment actions we will work very hard and consciously to overcome any lingering effects our history may still impose on our otherwise enlightened and meritocratic judgments.

The UB community must take these views to heart and continue our commitment to affirmative action; it has been and still is a right course of action for our university.

Notwithstanding federal and state laws regarding affirmative action and equal opportunity, there remain invidious forms of discrimination against members of groups that have not been traditionally or formally protected under federal law-discrimination, for example, on the basis of sexual orientation. Whatever protected groups may be specifically listed in any given law or policy, this point must be clear: The fundamental values of a university require that our judgments about persons be based on their individual merits, accomplishments, aptitudes and behaviors. Categorical discrimination of any sort has no place in such judgments; we will not countenance it. We must reject invidious categorical discrimination as wholly inappropriate to our university missions and values. That is our fundamental policy position, and that is what we practice in making our own decisions about admission, appointment and advancement of persons within the university.

We as a university community are committed to the personal, professional and intellectual growth of individuals and to encouraging the broader contributions which such growth makes possible. It is therefore essential that UB respect every individual; that we support every individual on the basis of his or her accomplishments, which collectively make possible our academic and professional endeavor; and that every one of us dedicate ourselves to creating a campus community in which all individuals feel valued, respected and encouraged to achieve.

Sincerely,

WILLIAM R. GREINER