Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

University Faculty Union Protects Streaking Professor

University Faculty Union Protects Streaking Professor

Edward Larkin, a professor of German at the public University of New Hampshire, plead guilty in November 2009 to charges accusing him of exposing himself to a 17 year old girl and her mother earlier that year. Despite this, he is still fully employed at UNH and collecting his $88,961 salary. Following a one semester suspension this coming Fall, Larkin will be back in the classroom.

Why? Last week, reporters from the Union-Leader discovered that, in April, an arbitrator ruled that the University could not fire Larkin, as per the language in his union-negotiated contract. According to the arbitrator, Larkin’s actions did constitute “moral deliquency,” but not “moral delinquency of a grave order,” the standard his deeds needed to meet for administrators to dismiss him. An official from the union, the American Association of University Professors, called the ruling “just.”

In response to criticism from officials as high up as Gov. John Lynch, union officials now say “there is a possibility that Larkin would focus on research rather than teaching” upon his return. Well, that’s much better. Just like the unfit-for-the-classroom employees in the New York City teachers’ union’s “rubber rooms” (which are now closed, except not really), the tuition dollars paid by UNH families will be going to a German teacher . . . that isn’t allowed to teach.

(H/T Inside Higher Ed)


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


There’s been a dearth of much-needed research in the field of “German” so this is good news. Other than run around naked, what exactly do they do in those “German” labs? Test theories on why the German language has more vowels than the Polish language?

VetHusbandFather | July 8, 2011 at 1:37 pm

What would have qualified as Moral Delinquency of a Grave Order… voting Republican?

1. Isn’t a discount grocer like Market Basket where the spit townies shop? It’s not like Larkin victimized a human being. (sarc)

2. If he had exposed himself to a student, especially an “activist” student, even one who was not underage, I suspect the outcome would have been different. If he had given racial or gender offense with a single dubious word, I suspect the outcome would have been different.

3. Bill, not content to be a high-profile conservative in the Ivy League, you are now implicitly questioning the legitimacy of university governance at UNH, the tenure system, and the AAUP. I don’t know if your daredevil behavior is gutsy or crazy–but it holds my attention.

Have him teach anatomy.

Vas es der problem? This is higher education, isn’t it? Seems pretty straightforward to me. Once he became a unionized member of the favored class he no longer has responsibilities or rules by which to live. Isn’t that what they’re promised>

He needs a better spokesperson. This is a free speech issue, not a sexually deviancy issue. He’s a victim. Marketing is key.

This is why liberals have no credibility. Here we have a pervert that cannot control himself and the libs dont see any problem with that.

this over at althouse

Here a femminsist cant stand an elevator ride with guys doing what guys do. hit on girls.

I have to object to the “headline”. The use of “Streaking” carries implications of youthful pranks, while this cretin exposed his penis to two women, one a minor, while otherwise remaining fully clothed. I seem to recollect the term which used to be used for those with this particular perversion was “flasher”, “streaker” carries a totally different connotation.