Scholarship of Professor Praised in Age Bias Suit : Court: Chicano activist Rodolfo Acuna of CSUN claims UC Santa Barbara unfairly denied his application for post.

A retired University of California historian, the highly regarded author of 13 books, praised the scholarship of Cal State Northridge professor and Chicano activist Rodolfo Acuna on Tuesday, saying UC Santa Barbara should have hired him.

Testifying in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, where Acuna is pressing an age discrimination suit against the University of California for rejecting his application, Ramon Eduardo Ruiz credited Acuna’s 1972 book, “Occupied America,” with “opening the national debate on the Chicano experience” and said it had been an unprecedented effort requiring tremendous research.

“When he did that I was really, really moved because someone of our background had undertaken to do that,” said Ruiz, who chaired the history department at UC San Diego and wrote Acuna a letter of recommendation after he applied to UC Santa Barbara in the fall of 1990.

“Most historians never do that. They take on little monographs,” he added.

But during his brief testimony late Tuesday as Acuna’s first witness, Ruiz said nothing about the now 63-year-old Acuna’s age and what role it might have played in the rejection of his job application in the spring of 1991.

Acuna claims that age was a key factor in the decision by UC Santa Barbara to deny his application for a senior professor’s post, and that his “age of 59” was noted several times in committee reports that recommended against hiring him.

During opening statements Tuesday in Acuna’s 3-year-old lawsuit, attorney Moises Vasquez described Acuna as the “father of Chicano studies.” He read excerpts from reviewers’ reports that Vasquez said demonstrated the university’s age bias.

“ ‘Dr. Acuna, at age 59, has never trained doctoral students,’ ” Vasquez quoted for the jury. “ ‘Many younger scholars would think him obsolete.’ ”

Acuna originally had alleged racial and ethnic bias by UC as well as age discrimination. But U.S. District Court Judge Audrey B. Collins dismissed that part of the suit earlier this year, leaving only the issue of age to be considered by the jury.

Vasquez still repeatedly raised the question of an ethnic or political bias during his opening statements, telling jurors that Acuna’s long career had been reviewed by scholars with no background in Chicano studies, some of whom may have been threatened by his strong views.

One member of a key review committee dismissed Acuna, who founded CSUN’s Chicano Studies Department, as a “polemicist and pamphleteer,” Vasquez said, while another warned that he might be too “politically pro-active” as an instructor.

Yet none of those claims address the lawsuit’s central issue, a UC lawyer reminded the jurors, urging them to repeatedly ask themselves throughout the case, “ ‘What does that have to do with age?’ ”

In an exhaustive description of UC’s hiring process, attorney Judith Keyes told jurors that “the quantity and quality” of Acuna’s scholarship had simply not met the university’s high standards for original research, particularly for someone of his experience seeking a senior-level, tenured post.

Acuna is undoubtedly a founder of the Chicano movement and deserves credit for that, Keyes said. But he has produced only three books during a 23-year career, with his most important work occurring early on, she said. Moreover, UC Santa Barbara’s Chicano Studies Department was sharply divided over whether to hire him, with three of six professors objecting to his appointment, Keyes said.

She also told the jury that Acuna was among 11 job candidates older than 50 who applied to the campus during the 1990-91 academic year, and all but Acuna were hired by then-Chancellor Barbara S. Uehling.

“Chancellor Uehling’s decision had nothing to do with Professor Acuna’s age,” Keyes said. “He was 59. So was she.”

Testimony was to continue today before Judge Collins, starting with Ruiz. Both sides have agreed that if Acuna wins the suit, he will recover about $350,000 in back and future pay; whether he would receive an appointment at UC would remain up to the judge.