OCU Reconsiders Divorce Policy
Oklahoma Christian University has gotten a little national attention for its plan to implement a written policy allowing President Mike O’Neal to fire workers who separate or divorce on other than “limited scriptural grounds.” I heard about it yesterday on the radio here in the D.C. area.
The school is now reconsidering the decision to have an explicit, written policy. Here are the details:
The policy also would have applied to prospective workers, which might have been denied employment if they had been divorced. The policy did not list accepted grounds for divorce, but O’Neal said they could include adultery and physical or emotional violence.
O’Neal said the change reflected an unwritten policy that already has led to several resignations. The policy may continue even if not in writing, he said, if the employee has not acted in keeping with university values like fidelity in marriage. O’Neal said he regrets the policy “wasn’t sensitive enough in its wording to the people who have experienced divorce.”
A former president of the university said Oklahoma Christian could have appeared “judgmental and uncaring.”
UPDATE: Here’s more on this topic from Christopher Heard.
related articles
- Constantly Directing? (June 23rd, 2007)
- Who Knew? (June 18th, 2007)
- Just War v. Pacifism Debate (April 21st, 2007)
- Cartoon War Casualty (April 18th, 2006)
- Black Republicans? (April 10th, 2006)
January 13th, 2006 at 6:54 pm
Why not just hire everyone on an “at will” basis, then just fire them when you feel like it?
January 16th, 2006 at 10:12 am
I don’t know. Perhaps it is an attempt to be fair and let people know what the expectations are ahead of time.
What bugs me though is the tendency to talk about divorce as something that happens to people rather than something that people choose to do: “O’Neal said he regrets the policy ‘wasn’t sensitive enough in its wording to the people who have experienced divorce.’”
Of course, it does happen to innocent, abused, and abandoned spouses. For the other spouses, it is something they choose to do. It’s also annoying that this policy is caricatured. Does anyone really think OCU is out to beat up on people who’ve already been victimized by a spouse?
Why did this story get national attention? Apparently, people against divorce are an odd curiosity these days.
This is probably just a preview of things to come with regard to Christian Universities and their personnel practices in other areas.
January 16th, 2006 at 10:22 am
I just readthat they recinded this new “rule”
January 16th, 2006 at 6:16 pm
Doesn’t any employer have the right to terminate an employee anymore when the employee violates or ignores the expectations set forth and agreed upon when the employer and employee began the employment relationship?
I am not sure of the law regarding when and on what basis employees and employers cn terminate an employment agreement and this is no judgment on OCU or any other institution, but it seems we are living in the T.O. era where we can sign a contract and then decide we should not be expected to uphold that contract.
As for OCU, I am not sure if a person should necessarily be fired because of a marriage failure but I also understand that I or anyone else does not have the full picture.
What I do wish is that are Christian institutions would always practice the grace of God even in their business practices.
January 17th, 2006 at 12:22 pm
“…it seems we are living in the T.O. era where we can sign a contract and then decide we should not be expected to uphold that contract.”
That was the law in post-Lochner 1905…
January 17th, 2006 at 5:27 pm
People divorce for many reasons, from the frivolous “I just have to find myself” to the most serious abuse cases. Monday morning quarter-backing any of those divorces can be akin to solving the proverbial chicken and egg debate. To another point, fortunately, or unfortunately, we don’t go peeping into the windows of those married folk whose marriages ended a long time ago and are not anywhere close to what God intended marriage to be. I can honestly see that (especially) at a Christian University there needs to be some sort of “marriage policy” (rather than a “divorce policy”) in that they need to be concerned about how ALL marriages are doing, not just those that end in a legal divorce. Of course, that would get into “meddling” so there you are.
January 17th, 2006 at 7:17 pm
I don’t think the point is to play Monday morning quarterback. I think the point is to ascertain whether the prospective professor (or current professor) believes that divorcing for such frivolous reasons is appropriate. I hope you would agree that such a view of marriage and divorce is not consistent with the mission of Christian universities.
In that context, it seems reasonable for such schools to at least ask about the reasons for a divorce and expect more of an answer than just, “it’s none of your business.”
January 17th, 2006 at 8:17 pm
I concur that the University has the right to ask a perspective employee about that matter. I just also believe they have the right, no make that the duty, to ask about how the marriages of perspective employees are too.
I tried to find the “rest of the story” so to speak, but followed your link and didn’t get any more info, so I’m not priivy to the specific details that prompted OCU’s actions.
I still say, if all OCU or any other Christian university, is considering is the divorce angle, they are still barking up only half of the tree. How the MARRIAGES are at the university seems to be an equally important matter, but for some reason, they don’t travel that path. We have equally compelling scripture dealing with how husbands and wives should relate to one another (and to God) as we do for divorce. That’s my point.
January 17th, 2006 at 8:44 pm
The problem, as you pointed out, is how to balance that legitimate need against the desire not to pry unnecessarily. I think, as a practical matter, divorce is more likely to become an issue because it is by its very nature a much more public act.
Judging the relative health of someone else’s marriage from the outside seems a much more dicey proposition to me than just inquiring about the reason for a divorce.
States used to require serious explanations for wanting a divorce. Unfortunately, they no longer do. Institutions that suggest one ought to have a serious (i.e. Scriptural) reason are the ones facing a stigma in today’s society — not the people who divorce for frivolous reasons. That seems backward to me.
January 17th, 2006 at 9:58 pm
I think stating a reason for a divorce would be a step forward from where we are now. And I agree with you on the divorce explanation position for employment. But I still think the issue of “marriage health” is “dicey” because many people, even good Christians with long marriages are unwilling to get honest with themselves and others about the health of their marriages and actually talk about it. You’re right, we don’t say, “Fred, how is your marriage doing?” because that is seen as prying. But living in community, as the scripture calls us to do, means getting involved in people’s lives. And where better to model that behavior than at a Christian university? If we all did that, maybe we wouldn’t have to have as many discussions about how to handle divorce in the church.