Successful Permissive Pet Policy Proposal
Due to the unique nature of live-in professional positions, stipulations are sometimes placed upon the personal lives of those who occupy these positions. Examples include policies on cohabitation, alcohol, and pets. This proposal will address the pet policy, presenting rationale in favor of allowing live-in professionals to possess certain types of pets--given some qualifications (See Appendix A).
Approximately NUMBER years ago, NAME OF COLLEGE made the decision to transform the Resident Director positions into full-time "professional" commitments. As the position of Resident Director was evolving, so was the typical candidate for the position. Today, the Resident Director position attracts a national pool of candidates who possess Masters degrees and range greatly in age and backgrounds.
While the live-in Resident Director positions at NAME OF COLLEGE are considered entry-level, possession of a Masters degree is required. Due to this requirement, the typical ages of Resident Directors will frequently fall within the range of twenty-three to twenty-six. Candidates are sometimes older, but rarely younger. Given the ages of these incoming professionals, many will have had significant periods of time in which to develop their independent, personal lives. Included in developing this life is often the acquisition of a pet.
The acquisition of a pet is an indulgence in which, according to Mediamark Research, 43% of all American households decide to partake. The popularity of pets is often due to the companionship they offer, but studies have also shown that possessing pets such as dogs reduces one's blood pressure and level of stress.
It is generally agreed that the Resident Director position can be intense and stressful. Being fully immersed within the world of the students requires significant sacrifices in lifestyle. An example of one potential sacrifice is the ability to live with one's significant other and/or child(ren). Fortunately, NAME OF COLLEGE has taken a pro-family position with regard to this potential sacrifice. This proposal asserts that a pet can be a significant family member, and should receive similar consideration. As much as a child is fully reliant upon the caring and attention of one individual or couple, so is the pet. Perhaps more importantly, minimizing the lifestyle sacrifices of live-in professionals--in an area as precious to people as their pets--will benefit not only the live-in professionals and their family units, but the University community as well.
In an effort to more clearly define a pet policy for NAME OF COLLEGE, the following stipulations are proposed. These stipulations are adapted from a successful pet policy at the NAME OF COLLEGE.
Resident Directors, being full-time professional staff members, are permitted pets as long as they comply with the following conditions:
1. A Resident Director considering attaining a pet must meet with the Director of Housing and Residence Life to discuss type of pet, size of animal, conditions for care, and overall guidelines in accordance with the expectations of Housing and Residence Life and NAME OF COLLEGE.
2. After consulting with the Director of Housing and Residence Life, a formal request for a pet must be made in writing specifying type of pet desired to the Director of Housing and Residence Life.
3. Resident Directors shall be responsible for any damage incurred to University furnishings or facilities as well as appropriate daily cleaning, maintenance, etc. (For example, prior to departure from the Resident Director position, the staff member will be required to commercially shampoo the University furniture and carpet contained in this apartment, and the office if appropriate). The vendor must be approved in advance by the Director. (If the University directs a change in hall/area assignment, the University will assume this responsibility, and the RD will provide commercial cleaning prior to his/her leave)
4. Pets are to be contained in the respective Resident Director's apartment, and if taken outside, it should be walked with a leash. (Additionally, pet owners must carry appropriate utensils/equipment for appropriate maintenance of grounds, i.e. pooper scoopers)
5. The Assistant Director for Residence Life will assume supervisory responsibilities for the Resident Director pet policy. If problems develop and they are not able to be resolved due to lack of compliance with the above stated guidelines, temperament of pet, environmental concerns, etc., the staff member will lose the privilege and be required to remove the pet from the premises.
6. Pets are to have all required licenses(annual renewal) for the City of NAME OF CITY and all appropriate shots including vaccinations, rabies, and distemper.
7. Returning staff will renew their agreement with the Director at the start of each year.
SIGNATURES of Director, Assistant Director, and Resident Director
Description of pet
When creating a proposal, the following two sections should be inserted between the "Current Situation" and "Summary Sections"
ADDRESSING THE CONCERN OF DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR STUDENTS AND LIVE-IN PROFESSIONALS:
A common concern among administrators in allowing live-in professionals to possess pets, or--more broadly--to enjoy privileges or perquisites not available to students, is that of setting "double standards". This proposal asserts that the different standards which students and live-in professionals experience are not only merited, but necessary.
At its most basic level, the title of the "live-in professional", or a "professional position" connotes a certain degree of maturity, competence, and responsibility. Indeed, as previously mentioned, the Resident Directors have often been professionals outside of the live-in experience, and have worked to attain a Masters degree. Generally, Resident Directors differ from students in the following respects:
1. They have received more years of education.
2. They are older and therefore possess more life and work experiences.
3. They are employed full-time by the University, and are required to live within the residence hall as a stipulation of their employment.
Distinctions and variations in privileges among students and Resident Directors have already been made due to these differences. For Example, Resident Directors have larger living areas and private bathrooms, as opposed to the smaller, shared living areas and bathrooms of students. Also, children and certain significant others are permitted to reside within the private quarters of the Resident Director. Different standards are necessary in dealing with two distinctly different populations within the residence hall. This proposal encourages the Department of Housing and Residence Life to continue to acknowledge the difference between live-in professionals and students, and extend it to the ability to possess certain pets.
ADDRESSING THE CONCERN REGARDING THE LACK OF A PRIVATE ENTRANCE FOR SOME RESIDENT DIRECTORS:
Another concern regarding allowing Resident Directors to possess pets is that some Resident Director apartments do not possess a private entryway--when the pet may require a certain amount of "outdoor time". The concern exists due to the possibility for--what may be considered--excessive exposure of the pet to the living or public areas of the residents. In cases of students with acute allergies to, or fears of, certain pets, it is believed that accommodations can be made to minimize--if not totally eliminate--the inconvenience experienced by such students. The accommodations that Resident Directors without private entryways may be required to observe are as follows:
1. Resident Director's pets will not be permitted in the residential area of the residence hall.
2. During transit, the Resident Director may carry the pet directly and promptly to the nearest exit, through a public (non-residential) area of the residence hall.
It is believed that total control and restraint of the pet, and a direct and immediate transit route will effectively prevent any difficulties for students with fears and/or allergies.
It is recommended that the proposal writer include a "Personal Statement" explaining the background between her/him and her/his current pet if one exists. The "Personal Statement" section may also be used to explain why it is important to be able have a pet live with you--how you believe it can benefit your experience, and how it has benefited you in the past. Include others in the writing of the proposal, and be sure to credit their contributions. Create a "coalition" if possible--there's strength in numbers!
Concern about damage?--require a deposit (someone who really wants to be with their pet would find a way to save thousands if necessary)
Concern about double standards?--if they were to have the same standards as residents they'd have a roommate and wouldn't be getting paid
Concerns about allergies or fears?--contact with others can be virtually eliminated via an effective policy
Concern about trusting a specific live-in professional?--say "no" to that one instead of all
"Been burned" before with a permissive pet policy?--practice what you preach, learn from mistakes and make necessary adjustments--don't quit
From the original 1998–2005 site. Details, prices and links may be out of date, so check them against your own campus policies.