And Still No Decision on Fly Club Case

Two years ago next week, Lisa J. Schkolnick '88 made a dramatic gesture. She filed a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) charging the all-male Fly Club with gender discrimination.

But nearly two years later, Schkolnick, now a first-year law student, is still waiting for word from the MCAD on whether it even has jurisdiction in the case.

Campus debate has subsided, and the Fly Club continues to refuse admission to women in its annual, highly secretive "punching" rituals.

Officials at the MCAD have hinted for weeks that a decision would be made "soon." And now they say only that the case will be resolved "shortly."

So once again opponents of the nine all-male final clubs must wait a little longer before their most recent challenge to the group's membership practices is answered.

This latest round in the battle against the clubs began more than five years ago, when the University severed official ties with the clubs after they refused to comply with Harvard's anti-discrimination policies and admit women.

But until Schkolnick's complaint was filed in December of 1987, campus activism about the clubs' discrimination was dormant. With that complaint came a new wave of controversy--and a new undergraduate group formed to rally support for Schkolnick and her cause.

Last spring, that new group--called Stop With-holding Access Today (SWAT)--was added as a co-complainant in the MCAD case, along with Schkolnick, who was then studying in Cairo for a year.

But since then, the state agency has not been heard from.

Their official line is simply that the case is a difficult one, and that it takes time to do a thorough job examining its subtleties.

MCAD Commissioner Kathleen M. Allen will only say, "The case is still under investigation in the legal department." But she does add that the commission has been working "as quickly as we could."

Allen says that additional issues have been raised during the investigation of the case, "and these are not ones we want to see dealt with summarily. They deserve careful attention."

But Kevin G. Baker, the lawyer for Schkolnick and SWAT, says, "I think the commission has had ample time to come to a decision."

Never Famous for Speed

"The commission has never been famous for speed," notes Baker, who works at the Boston firm of Shilepsky, Messing and Rudavsky. "I am not terrifically surprised."

Baker concededs that the MCAD is "under a lot of work pressure" because of a small staff and a big caseload. But he says, "The commission made it very clear that investigative briefings were to be completed last [spring]. They have had nothing new from either side."

In fact, Baker now puts the onus on Allen, saying the timing and fate of Schkolnick's complaint rests in the commissioner's hands.

"The decision that is before Kathy Allen will be made when she makes it," Baker says.

But Allen says the investigation is not yet concluded. And she adds that state budget cuts have had some effect on the speed of the decision, but have not been the main factor for the delay in the Fly Club case.

Schkolnick says the two-year wait has been difficult for her. "The suspense is killing me," she says. "It's hard to see the wheels of justice moving so slowly."

The long wait for a decision is "apparently not atypical" and "doesn't have to do with the merits of the case," Schkolnick says. But she says it is frustrating that "what they say will happen has nothing to do with what will happen."

Six weeks ago, the commission had said they would reach a decision on the case within two weeks.

Schkolnick says the delay in hearing from the MCAD does not only affect herself. "Every day that things don't change is a bad day," she says.

"The existence of the case is changing attitudes" about the clubs at Harvard, Schkolnick says. "The only way things are going to improve for Harvard" is if the MCAD decides the complaint in her favor, she says.

Schkolnick says that she understands some of the obstacles blocking the commission from deciding her case more quickly.

"A Harvard problem is not a priority, and rightly so," Schkolnick says. "[The MCAD] has very immediate problems" like discrimination in housing and the job market. She says she feels that, "sometime, if they have a free moment, they will get to me."

However, Schnolnick feels that it is possible the two-year wait could affect the outcome of the case. Because the complaint and the publicity have been less immediate, there is "less pressure on [MCAD] to make the progressive decision."

Schkolnick says she feels that one of the reasons that the final club issue has lost some of its momentum on campus is because of the kind of discrimination involved in the case.

"Because the case is about women, people don't perceive it as important," she says. There would be much more concern if Blacks or Jews were excluded from the Fly Club, Schkolnick says.

Fly Club attorney Casimir De Rham '46, who is with the Boston firm of Palmer and Dodge, could not be reached for comment. De Rham has refused to speak with the press about the case since Schkolnick filed her complaint in December of 1987.