Shortchanged, Short on Safety
Two acts of violence reportedly occurred since Oct. 30 on Georgetown’s campus, raising safety concerns yet again. As we reflect on the well-being of our community and the actions necessary to prevent further violence, the answers to these problems are often unclear. One thing is clear, however: Supporting those committed to keeping us safe is a crucial part of preventing future hate crimes. Department of Public Safety officers deserve the respect of our community and the institutional support of our university so that they can do their jobs to the best of their ability.
The rhetoric of safety has become ubiquitous on this campus, so it is ironic to find that respect for DPS does not match our concern. Since August, DPS, with the backing of its union, Allied International, has been negotiating with the university to sign on a new work contract. The department’s goal is to acquire the basic working conditions that its peers in D.C. have already — namely, decent pay and adequate staffing. To this end, DPS officers are requesting a starting-pay increase of $4 over the course of three years — though the newest figure being discussed is lower than DPS’ initial proposal. They believe that better conditions will end the high turnover rates now plaguing Georgetown’s campus security force.
The department is understaffed, and its employees are underpaid and have little hope for career advancement. These conditions make long-term employee retention unlikely. This revolving-door effect deprives officers of the chance to acquire a thorough understanding of the community. Such an understanding is integral to their ability to keep us safe.
Currently, our campus police officers are among the lowest paid in the city. The Catholic University of America, for example, provides its officers a starting hourly salary $3 higher than Georgetown offers its officers. The George Washington University offers similar compensation.
An understaffed DPS compromises the ability of officers to patrol effectively. In a campus community that should have three investigative officers, in light of recent safety concerns, Georgetown has only one. Given these realities, any shortcomings in campus safety partly reflect the administration’s hesitance to provide properly for campus police officers. Do we really expect to prevent hate crimes and sexual assaults without sufficient personnel?
While students and workers discuss strategies to make our community safer, Georgetown officials continue to concern themselves solely with the financial bottom line. They have as yet refused to heed officers’ demands for a just wage that puts workers on par with local universities and allows them to do their jobs well. This lack of support must be addressed in order to improve the security of our community in a definitive and progressive way.
Fortunately, Georgetown’s own tradition provides some insight to getting beyond this impasse. Our Jesuit tradition asks us to care not only for the self but also for every individual in our larger community. As we work through the trauma of recent events, we cannot afford to adopt an “us and them” attitude. We cannot isolate ourselves from the very people who are committed to keeping us safe. The onus is on us to live and act in a way consistent with the ideals of our institution.
In the coming weeks, we must realize that we do not live in a vacuum, but that our actions (and inaction) necessarily affect those around us. We must stand in solidarity with DPS officers in demanding that Georgetown respects their right to a fair wage on par with that of their D.C. peers’. This is the only course of action that will lead to improved campus safety for all.
Catherine Wright is a junior in the College and a member of the Georgetown Solidarity Committee.
To send a letter to the editor on a recent campus issue or Hoya story or a viewpoint on any topic, contact opinion@thehoya.com. Letters should not exceed 300 words, and viewpoints should be between 600 to 800 words.


Nov 06 2009 at 9:47 p.m.
I have heard that DPS officers used to have the ability to defend themselves as they were previously armed, and that this ability has since been taken away. Does anyone know if this is accurate?
Nov 08 2009 at 2:09 p.m.
DPS officers have never carried fire arms. In the past year, they began carrying defensive weapons - nightsticks and mace.