 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
  |
|||||
 |
 |
Writing
Pet Policies for Live-In Staff
By Wendy M.
Wallace, Assistant Director of Residence Life
Colorado State University
A leading
trend in the field of housing and residence life is that of reexamining
pet policies for live-in professional staff, which has resulted in many
departments creating pet policies for their live-in staff. While grassroots
in origin, senior housing officers should also be responsible for considering
how a change toward a pet policy for live-in staff will benefit their
institution.
The professional
live-in position will typically attract a national pool of candidates.
As the field of Residence Life becomes more professional, and graduate
degrees are more often required, candidates will have had significant
residence life experience as well as range greatly in age and backgrounds.
Due to the requirement of a graduate degree, the typical age of professional
live-in staff will frequently fall within the range of twenty-four to
twenty-eight years old. Candidates are sometimes older, but rarely younger.
Given the ages of these incoming professionals, many will have had significant
periods in which to develop their independent, personal lives. Included
in developing this life is often the acquisition of a pet.
Due to the
unique nature of live-in professional positions, stipulations must sometimes
be placed upon the personal lives of those who occupy these positions.
Examples include policies on cohabitation, alcohol, candles, and pets.
Live-in residence life positions require mature, responsible adults who
have committed their lives to being positive, healthy role models for
students and colleagues.
It is generally
agreed that the live-in professional residence life position can be intense
and stressful. Being fully immersed within the world of college 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, some institutions have taken a pro-family and
pro-partner position with regard to this potential sacrifice. A pet policy
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.
Recruitment
and Retention of Full-Time Live-In Professional Staff
The job-market
for full-time live-in professional staff is becoming increasingly more
competitive. In order to remain competitive in recruiting professional
staff, benefits and salary must be comparable with other institutions.
Allowing the opportunity to own a pet while living in the residence halls,
will not only increase the pool of candidates applying for live-in professional
positions, but also retain them for a longer period of time.
One reason
that many professional staff members choose to move out of residence life
into live-off positions is the restrictions that colleges and universities
place upon the professional’s living situation and lifestyle. There
is often little or no choice with regard to the apartment that a professional
(and his/her family) has to live in. It is a reality that as a live-in
professional your life will be critically examined by the staff and residents
of the building in which you live, and seldom do professionals have the
opportunity to live in a location which allows them the freedom to own
a pet other than fish.
"If
I could have a pet, I would choose to live-in for a longer period of time,"
is a common statement made by professionals moving out of the field into
positions in which they can have greater control over their living situation.
For a live-in
professional without a partner or family, security is a common concern.
The ability to own a pet could provide a further measure to allow that
staff member to feel safe and secure in their environment. When that staff
member chooses to exercise in the outdoors, in order to increase their
physical health, safety is often at the forefront of their attention.
Bringing along a pet, more specifically a dog, would allow a greater sense
of security and protection.
Another
common issue facing live-in professionals is dealing with burnout and
finding balance with their multiple demands. Long days, often working
well into the evening and weekends with staff meetings and programs, contributes
greatly to the burnout of professionals. Owning a pet could provide some
sense of stress relief for live-in professionals and thus a better sense
of well being which would be carried over into the job setting.
Pet Policies
at Other Institutions
Contact
several institutions to find out if they have pet policies for their live-in
staff and which issues are addressed in their policy. For the institutions
with such pet policies, there are usually guidelines for pet owners and
pets. The guidelines include proper vaccinations, licenses, restrictions
on where pets may be present, disposal of pet feces, and regulations and
financial restitution for damage caused by the pet. Some institutions
have strict requirements regarding the type of pet that is allowed, while
others are more flexible. The Live-In Professional Report provides an
excellent compilation of institutions with policies for pets.
The Live-In Professional Report is a report generated from professionals self-reporting various statistics regarding live-in benefits. It is compiled by Rich Horowitz of Long Island University – CW Post. It allows current staff members and departments to compare themselves with national norms and allows staff members searching for positions to know institution’s policies upfront. Based on the 2001 Live-In Professional Report, 101 institutions allow live-in professionals to have cats (up from 73 in 2000) and 61 institutions allow live-in professionals to have dogs (up from 45 in 2000). There is a changing norm to allow live-in professionals the opportunity to become pet owners.
Health
Benefits of Pet Ownership
The health
benefits of pet ownership have been well documented. With regard to physical
health, pet ownership has resulted in decreased stress levels, cholesterol
levels, and risk for heart attacks for some people. A statement on The
Health Benefits of Pets from the National Institute of Health can be found
at the following website:
http://odp.od.nih.gov/consensus/ta/003/003_statement.htm
(current as of June 28, 2001)
Pets also
have been known to provide unconditional support, love, and companionship
for people, thus improving the emotional well-being of some individuals.
Chicken Soup for Pet Lover’s Soul provides numerous stories
documenting the qualitative benefits of pet ownership, thus appealing
to the heart of professionals making the decision about a pet policy.
Addressing
Concerns
Whether
current live-in staff or their supervisors are considering a pet policy,
several issues must be explored in relation to individual campuses.
It is important
to address specific institutional concerns regarding a pet policy for
live-in professional staff members: a perceived "double standard"
for live-in staff versus residents, damage to University property, cleaning,
allergies, and obligations of pet owners.
- Residents:
A common concern among administrators in allowing full-time, live-in
professionals to possess pets, or more broadly, to enjoy privileges
or perquisites not available to students, is that of setting "double
standards." A pet policy should assert that the different standards
which students and live-in professionals experience are not only merited,
but also 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, live-in staff have often been professionals outside of the live-in experience, and have worked to obtain a graduate degree. Live-in professionals differ from students in the following respects:
- They have received more years of education.
- They are significantly older and possess more life and work experience.
- They
are employed full-time by the University, and are required to live
within the residence hall as a stipulation of their employment.
Proposals should maintain that pets would not be allowed in residence hall rooms or public spaces unless determined as acceptable by the institution.
The live-in staff apartments are considered permanent homes, while residents are more transitory and do not occupy their space on a year-round basis. Furthermore, the live-in staff apartments are considerably larger than a residence hall room, thus allowing greater space for a pet to roam around. Additionally, some live-in staff apartments have an exterior entrance, which prevents the pet from occupying or moving through indoor, public space.
In many ways, live-in staff serve as role models to students and staff members. Thus, live-in staff must limit their lifestyle to maintain that role. In fact, role modeling appropriate pet care and responsibility is another method by which live-in staff can serve as role models for future citizens.
- Damage:
A concern for maintenance staff, which immediately arises, is that of
damage to the apartment caused by the pet. Whether it is cat scratches
to furniture or carpet that is destroyed by pet "accidents,"
a proposal could place all financial responsibility in the hands of
the live-in staff for restitution of damages. This will be accomplished
by requiring a damage deposit upon the acquisition of a pet (much like
off-campus rental companies may collect), annual inspections of the
live-in staff apartments, and financial responsibility for damage caused
by the pet.
An Apartment Inventory form for live-in staff apartments would provide evidence of the current status of an apartment, as well as inventory the condition of any University furniture. Through the Apartment Inventory checklist, a live-in staff member could be held responsible for excess cleaning and damage caused to the apartment.
- Cleaning:
Apartment cleanliness both during occupancy and post occupancy may be
a concern for custodial staff members. Continued standards of cleanliness,
as it relates to health issues, should be maintained with pet ownership.
Further, pet owning live-in staff members have a further obligation
to make sure that the apartment they leave be as clean as it was when
they arrived on campus. This also includes thorough vacuuming and cleaning
of carpets and University furniture.
- Allergies:
In consideration of the next live-in staff member to occupy an apartment,
pet owning professionals would have an obligation to thoroughly clean
their apartments, including HEPA-vacuuming their carpets and curtains,
which picks up pet dander.
- Obligations
of Pet Owners: Pet owners would have an obligation to clean up after
their pets. This would include properly disposing of all pet feces in
their own personal trash cans or in the dumpsters located outside each
hall. Disposing of feces in public trash cans would not be acceptable.
Suggested
Components of a Pet Policy
- Number
of Allowable Pets
- Type
of Allowable Pets
- Standards
of Behavior by Animal and Pet Owner
- Deposit
- Guidelines
for Vacating the Apartment
- Guidelines
for Cleaning and Damages
- Signature
Suggested
Checklist Prior to Pet Ownership
| Staff Name: _______________ | |
| Pet Start Date: _______________ | |
| •Discuss with Director (or designated staff member) | |
| •Immunization Record | Date on file:________ |
| •Spay/Neuter Record | Date on file:________ |
| •License (dog only) | Date on file:________ |
| •Declaw Record (cat only) | Date on file:________ |
| •Personal Renter's Insurance (not mandatory) | |
| •$200 Deposit | Date on file:________ |
| •Apartment Condition Inventory | Date on file:________ |
| •Agreement Signed | Date on file:________ |
Suggested
Checklist Prior to Pet Departure
| Staff Name: _______________ | |
| Anticipated Vacate Date: _______________ | |
| •Apartment is clean (including HEPA vacuumed) | |
| •Apartment Condition Inventory | On file date:________ |
| List Damages (explanation of damages and charges to staff member): | |
Submitting
a Proposal
Each institution
of higher education and department of housing has different procedures
for making policy changes. First, talk with your supervisor and make sure
they will support you in your proposal. Talk with maintenance and custodial
staff in order to effectively address their concerns. Check to see if
your campus has any regulations regarding pets in buildings, and whether
an exemption may have to be made for your circumstances. And finally,
write a proposal and draft policy to be submitted to the official making
the decision. Example policies from comparable institutions and a copy
of the Live-In Professional Report are helpful supplements to a proposed
policy change.
If At
First You Don’t Succeed
For some, success will come easily. Some will spend considerable time presenting the proposal and talking with many staff members before it is accepted. For others, whether they are personal or institutional reasons, a pet policy will not be passed. Know that you have asked the question in a mature and thoughtful way. Then, you must make the choice whether this issue will impact your choice to remain at your current institution, as well as the choice of future institutions you work for. Perhaps the next institution will be receptive. Each step that staff take to recognize the changing nature of the live-in professional position and grant changes to honor these hard working staff members will be a successful move for the profession.
A copy of
the Colorado State University pet policy is
available by clicking here. Please feel free to contact the author
at wwallace@lamar.colostate.edu
if you have additional questions.
About the Author
Wendy M. Wallace is an Assistant Director of Residence Life at Colorado State University. She has served in residence life roles for seven years, and successfully wrote and achieved a pet policy for full-time live-in professional staff at Colorado State University.