The community was shocked when the Board of Trustees fired Jo Ann Argersinger in 1999, only 11 months after she began her job as chancellor.
Her abrupt termination tore the University, leaving Argersinger supporters clinging to one side, Board supporters on the other and hardly anyone standing on middle ground.
Argersinger sued alleging wrongful termination by the Board and discrimination by SIU administrators. The court drove a stake through Argersinger's case Tuesday, dismissing it because she lacked sufficient evidence.
The 40 pages of factual information delivered by the judge proves beyond doubt that the Board did have the right to fire Argersiner. She had a tendency to be headstrong, and the court cited several examples in which she bypassed then-SIU President Ted Sanders and made comments to campus groups and the media before discussing them privately with the president. These actions only served to divide the community.
The Board, while rightfully vindicated, should have done a better job of making a clean break from Argersinger. In the Jackson County lawsuit, the Board admitted to violating the Open Meetings Act by not providing sufficient notice before the meeting where her termination was discussed.
Also, the judge said in her ruling that the University did violate Argersinger's due process when it terminated her without providing her with six months notice. Argersinger, however, wasn't suing for breach of contract.
Besides, she did sign a contract saying she would serve at the pleasure of the Board. Most of us serve the pleasure of a boss, whether it is the manager of a restaurant or the CEO of a corporation, and when the boss isn't happy, you aren't given six months notice. In fact, you're considered lucky to get six minutes.
The court also ruled that Argersinger did not have enough evidence in her claim that she was sexual discriminated against by University officials. She specifically named John Jackson, who temporarily filled the chancellor's position upon her firing and lowered her salary when she left the chancellor's position and joined the History Department.
"Clearly, I didn't enjoy being sued in the process of what I regarded to be just doing my job," Jackson said two days after the ruling.
Nobody fielded the criticism from Argersinger's termination more than Jackson, and he was just doing his job. While Sanders soon resigned, Jackson was left with the bitter aftertaste of leading a University that was torn by the board's actions.
Plain and simple, Jackson got a raw deal. After three decades of commitment to SIUC, he inherited a position stained with controversy and contention. If you judge a good leader on popularity, Jackson was lacking, but he is very much the one who held things together as stones were hurled from every direction, something we say is more the mark of a good leader.
In another time and another situation, we believe Jackson would have been one of SIUC's finest administrators. And yet, in his most defining moment as chancellor, he resigned his post at the request of much of the University community.
Jackson and the rest of us have been through enough. It's time to put this 38-month legal battle in the past.
Dr. Argersinger, if you truly care about what is best for this University, you will choose not to appeal this case. It would take a far braver feat for you to swallow your pride and serve as a professor where you can do the most good than to fight a battle you will never win.
Time and again, students have said that you are an excellent history professor, some saying, in fact, that you were their most profound and inspiring teacher in their University career. We hope you choose to stay here.
But please, don't drag us again through all the pain and raw emotion this case has caused.
It seems that you have been given a choice, and how you handle it will define who you are as a person - one who loses with grace and dignity or one who selfishly pushes the University back into shark-infested politics.
Yes, there will always be those who believe you were the martyr fighting against a glorified version of the good ole boys club, just as there will also be those that shutter at the mention of your name. Through your strong will, whether right or wrong, that is the legacy you have chosen for your short reign in the University's most important leadership position.
To the rest of the University community, it may be a long time before we can forget this whole ugly mess, but if we truly are committed to moving forward, it's time we learn to forgive.
Published on 11/17/05; 12:24:44 PM
