JUMP CUT
|
|
Jill Monroe Fankhauser: “It’s fairly common knowledge that it’s financially beneficial to the university that part-time adjuncts don't cost as much as full-timers.” Charlene Crupi: “The myth is that the key to success is education, because here we are, highly educated, so America’s dispossed are taking on a whole new face...and our dedication is the very thing that makes us exploitable.” Sarah Heath: “I figured out once that at 70 hours a week, I'm really not earning that much above the minimum wage. I might as well be working at McDonalds.... The university is making a lot of money from us. I'm convinced of it.” “[University administrators] are really operating a business for profit under the guise of a non-profit education, are setting this up and abusing and exploiting us for profit.” |
Structural
causes Not only are the problems faced by part-timers structural, but the causes of these problems as well. I have pointed to one cause above in linking the structural unemployment of faculty to the decline in new tenure-track jobs. The overproduction of PhDs has become endemic in the humanities, but it now extends as well into engineering and the sciences. In these fields, successive low-paid postdoctoral fellowships now routinely last for five years or more for new PhDs who are unable to find good jobs in a bad market, and even postdocs are organizing to improve their deteriorating working conditions.22 Just as the adjuncts in Degrees of Shame compare their situation with that of farm workers, here we see striking parallels to graduate assistants and part-time faculty Organizing
in the 90s at an accelerating rate, graduate assistants increasingly
recognize themselves as employees and cheap labor rather than as paid
apprentice-students, which is how they are described by university managers
seeking to mystify their work and avoid unionization.23
Graduate assistants organize because they lack
health insurance, dont make a living wage, and need tuition waivers
and adequate grievance procedures. But they
also organize because of a deteriorating job market. They can think
of themselves as apprentices, sacrificing for future careers and the
love of knowledge, only as long as the goal, a good tenure-track job,
remains a reasonable expectation. But more and more in recent years
graduate assistants see their own futures foretold as they see that
PhDs from their programs only get jobs as adjuncts and postdocs
more of the same grind with little prospect of improvement. Even for
those in the humanities, often socialized to mystify their work as preserving
the quasi-religious essence of civilization against the invading barbarians,
this can be too much. As Andrew Ross has suggested, the reality of these
graduate students own labor emerges from behind the ideological
cult of work which sustains their own exploitation.24
They begin, unevenly, to see the systemic features
of their situation within a deeply flawed market structure. Analytically
or intuitively, more and more of them understand that they have little
to lose but their middle-class illusions. They connect their own experience
analytically to larger structures. Likewise,
when a critical mass of adjunct faculty forms, many experience a similar
consciousness-raising, and some start to organize. Behind
the limited market power of seemingly pampered professors
lies a much stronger structural demand, the institutional need for graduate
assistants as cheap labor. After numerous calls for voluntary and radical
enrollment reductions, especially in marginal programs, the continuing
overproduction of PhDs demonstrates that many doctoral programs cannot
change their admission policies even if they wanted to. Especially in
liberal arts departments driven by the need for large numbers of graduate
assistants to teach lower-division undergraduate requirements, these
doctoral programs produce PhDs less in response to the demands of any
outside job market and more as a by-product of their own need for cheap
labor. Increasingly, exploited non-tenure-track faculty and postdocs
form a structural unit along with exploited graduate teaching and research
assistants; the graduate students often ascend to the same roles a few
years later. Thus a
superficial cause masks a deeper one. Institutions respond to the limited
market power of a relatively few senior professors, but only because
those professors goals to teach graduate students and to
have time to do their research happen to match the institutions
own needs. Many blame
decreasing public support for the financial problems that generate abuses
of the adjunct system. While it is true that taxpayer revolts like Californias
Proposition 13 have been a major cause of public higher educations
money problems, we seldom hear about the underlying reason for those
revolts. In fact, individual taxpayers have increasingly had to make
up the revenue lost from a growing variety of tax breaks and other forms
of corporate welfare. Just at the federal level, welfare for corporations
and the rich amounts to at least $448 billion a year, and corporations
share of the tax burden has dropped from 31% in the 1950s to 11% today.25
At state and local levels, where public education gets most of its public
funding, governments compete against one another in a race to
the bottom—for example, in handing out huge tax breaks
for businesses such as sports stadiums.26 If corporations
and the rich paid their share, public college and university budget
problems, not to mention a whole host of even more pressing public deficits,
would disappear instantly. Most public
colleges and universities have always lacked institutional autonomy,
and capitalist globalization increasingly assimilates them to corporate
models. Why should professors have the lifetime job security of tenure
when no one else does, says the new conventional wisdom. Casualization
and outsourcing of the workforce, widening gaps between
tiers of more and less skilled workers, instrumentalization of labor,
and privatization all constitute large, long-term trends, now imported
into colleges and universities. And these trends have recently intensified
with the global domination of multinational capital over the nation-state.27
To understand
the degradation of faculty and graduate assistant work structurally,
we need to see it as the application to contemporary higher education
of a practice developed by nineteenth-century capitalists, which was
originally called the Babbage principle.28
As analyzed by Harry Braverman in his classic
Labor and Monopoly Capital, capitalists learn to commodify labor
and extract maximum surplus value from it by pushing beyond the conventional
social division of labor to a establishing a detailed division of labor.
Here the
capitalists break down the whole production process into smaller and
smaller units, and they divide workers into isolated and atomized tasks,
categories determined by skill level. Thus the capitalists can increase
profits by paying workers only the minimum amount, calculated on the
basis of the particular narrow tasks assigned, and thus reducing the
number of workers doing highly skilled and highly paid work. Combined
with automation, the whole process of fragmenting production makes each
task less skilled and less valuable, each worker a cog in a machine
that only owners and managers understand. Workers are deskilled, their
knowledge and command of the larger production process eroded, and their
relation to the finished product alienated.29 It is
not difficult to see the alarming relevance of this analysis, originating
from the battles between industrial workers and bosses for over more
than a century, to academic labor today. Is the smallest unit of teaching
labor the individual course? How little is it worth? Or is it the individual
student paper, graded in a large lecture course perhaps by an anonymous
moonlighting adjunct or teaching assistant from another university?
Is the most efficiently produced and consumed higher education commodity
the low-quality course, with minimal reading and writing, forced on
adjuncts or TAs by overwork, lack of resources, and at lower-tier
schools the resentments of disadvantaged students who must finance college
with long hours at low-paid jobs? What is
the smallest unit of academic research labor? Perhaps humanities faculty,
still writing long discursive articles and books, could learn from our
more advanced cousins in science and engineering. There the process
of quantification as commodification has gone much further, and the
cynical concept of the least publishable unit routinely
generates multiple publications from the same research by breaking down
reports of results into artificially small segments. Thus science and
engineering faculty maximize their rewards, based on numbers of publications,
for the same expenditure of (mostly postdoc and research assistant)
time and energy. It is admirable efficiency and entrepreneurship, but
while those at the top of the faculty food chain learn to commodify
their research, and those at the bottom to commodify their teaching,
faculty deskill themselves, and shared democratic governance withers.
Faculty get rewarded for thinking about means rather than ends, parts
rather than wholes, for thinking technically and professionally
rather than critically and holistically. Too few have the time or ability
to attend to the whole institutional process of the production and dissemination
of knowledge, so that technocratic administrators assume more and more
control. June Nash
explains the consequences of deskilling on faculty and graduate assistant
teaching and research:
Yet the faculties and students at elite schools remain largely protected from the overuse of part-timers, which occurs mostly at schools with more disadvantaged students. Combined with the disproportionately large number of women among part-time faculty, this produces a growing class, gender and racial hierarchy among both faculty and students during a period when higher education has become ever more central to social power and economic success. The American system of higher education since the nineteenth century has had a reputation for its egalitarian character and openness, especially when compared with its European counterparts.31 Such growing inclusiveness culminated with the open admission policies initiated in the 1960s. But the fiscal crisis of the 1970s, growing out of those open admissions and the tax revolts grounded in a diminishing corporate tax base, led to (among other things) an expanded use of part-time faculty.32 Although groups formerly excluded from college have gained access, the expansion of the higher education system has come at the expense of inscribing a new class hierarchy within it. The future generations who will undertake the most responsible roles in the society now seem limited largely to those at elite colleges and universities, while the rest will learn to follow orders, mostly for technical tasks and mid-level service jobs. Time
to organize I emphasize
the structural dimensions of the problem not to overwhelm you with how
much needs to be done but to demonstrate how seemingly discrete issues
casualization, GA exploitation, privatization, tuition increases,
tenure form a pattern also visible elsewhere in capitalisms
contemporary mutations. Were all in this together, all the tiers
of the academic workforce, including tenured, tenure-track, full-time
non-tenure-track, and part-time faculty and graduate assistants. What
they can do to one of us or to one tier, they can and will do to all.
Realizing
this, the most exploited lead the way. During the last few years, graduate
assistants and non-tenure-track faculty have started organizing in earnest,
and unions and other associations are spreading rapidly. Twelve
campuses, including three at the State University of New York, had T.A.
unions three years ago, according to the A.F.L-C.I.O. Today, there are
23 unionized campuses, with serious movements under way at institutions
like Yale, Temple, Oregon State and New York University.33
Organizers biggest victory has come in California, where T.A.s
at eight University of California campuses voted in the spring of 1999
to unionize. Representing nearly 10,000 graduate-student employees,
the unions are affiliated with the United Auto Workers. T.A.s at Berkeley
have been fighting for collective-bargaining rights since 1983; Ricardo
Ochoa, union president there, gives credit for the victory to a
strong union, a system-wide T.A. strike in December [1998], legislative
pressure, and a favorable ruling by PERB,34
the Public Employment Relations Board. Not to
be outdone, part-time and other non-tenure-track faculty are organizing
as well. On campuses countrywide, they are raising consciousness, drawing
attention to problems, and signing up members to new organizations.
Since a critical mass of non-tenure-track faculty often forms in large
cities with multiple colleges and universities, the first concerted
action has taken place in urban academic markets. In New York, CUNY
Adjuncts Unite! organizes non-tenure-track faculty and links their struggle
with the assault on public higher education, which is particularly vicious
there. CUNYs full-time faculty declined from 11,300 in 1974
to 5,300 in 1998; the university systems 7,200 adjuncts now comprise
60 percent of the faculty but make up only 10 percent of the faculty
union, the Professional Staff Conference (PSC).35
In Boston,
national activity and organization has promoted local activism. The
AAUP and other faculty and labor organizations have helped to plan and
fund the Coalition of Contingent Academic Labor (COCAL), a national
network of activists which brings together part-time and non-tenure-track
faculty with graduate teaching and research assistants. At the Third
National Congress of COCAL in Boston in April 1999, faculty from a number
of campuses in the Boston area founded the Boston Organizing Project
to improve the working conditions of adjunct faculty and defend the
integrity of higher education.36
The AAUPs
Richard Moser describes the activity in Chicago and elsewhere:
In these organizing, lobbying, and educational drives, Degrees of Shame has become an important tool. Hundreds of copies of the video are circulating in at least 40 states, and Barbara Wolf is making a follow-up tape to be released in 2000, looking at the organizing and other activities spreading around the country. Goals
for adjunct unions include a minimum wage and improved benefits. At
the University of Massachusetts-Boston, unionized part-time faculty
have won half-time status and full benefits.38
Here it has become clear to many that their long-range
goal must be to remove the financial incentives administrators have
for hiring non-tenure-track faculty in the first place: all faculty
must be paid on a prorated basis, with benefits, for every course they
teach. Administrators complaints about tight budgets lose credibility
as faculty and others examine institutional priorities, including subsidized
commercial research and soaring administrative costs.39
As Brodie Dollinger of the National Association
of Graduate and Professional Students puts it, I will believe
them about the budget when they hire the first part-time dean.40
The wave
of adjunct and graduate assistant organizing is also creating other
new institutions and prodding established ones to action. The National
Adjunct Faculty Guild, founded in 1993, offers its members a job list,
a magazine, the adjunct advocate, an e-mail discussion list, and an
annual conference. 41While
about 23% of full-time faculty are currently represented by unions,
the figure is only about 10% for part-timers,41 so that the Guild has
been debating whether adjuncts should form their own national labor
union.42 Seventeen
professional and disciplinary associations have organized the Coalition
on the Academic Workforce (CAW). This group seeks to persuade
accrediting agencies to articulate recommended ceilings for percentages
of non-tenure-track faculty in specific departments,43
a variation on a strategy faculty unions have
used at the bargaining table with limited success. In addition, CAW
seeks to delineate more precisely the crisis dimensions in particular
schools and departments with a nationwide survey in a wide range of
disciplines. Since the extent of teaching by faculty and graduate assistants
who do not make a living wage can be embarrassing to colleges and universities,
administrators often view it as a public relations problem. They are
not anxious to collect, let alone publicize, exact current information
about their exploitation of academic labor. As Virginia Wright Wexman,
representing the Society for Cinema Studies on CAW, put it in an online
letter to SCS members referring to part-time faculty, Up until
now, we have had no reliable data comparing the number and nature of
such positions at various institutions, and criticisms of prevailing
practices that rely on anecdotal evidence in the absence of such data
have had relatively little impact.44
Graduate
assistants have founded Workplace: the Journal for Academic Labor online,
published by the Graduate Student Caucus of the Modern Language Association.
Impressively militant and incisive, its April 1999 issue includes a
telling analysis of mainstream faculty unions often complacent
response to the crisis of academic labor. In a critique of a recent
article in On Campus, published by the American Federation of Teachers
for its higher-education members, Guest Editor Bruce Simon unpacks the
paternalistic assumptions of even many faculty union members.45
The point is not to attack allies but to show that
faculty unions are not immune from the prevailing model of business
trade unionism which tends to focus on pacting with management rather
than on broad mobilization.46
Organizing
by contingent faculty should be seen in the context of new energy and
militance in sections of the larger American labor movement. There are
attempts to reverse nearly half a century of atrophying union power
since the A.F.L.-C.I.O. expelled communists and other leftists from
its ranks in the fifties and accepted a secondary partnership in the
mid-century social contract now broken.47
A great opportunity will have been lost if the
organizing energy of exploited faculty and graduate assistants does
not reinvigorate the established faculty and education unions, the AAUP,
AFT, and NEA, who need to put more resources into organizing the unorganized.
Finally,
these beginnings in forming an academic labor movement can connect with
student activism and town-gown coalitions to produce new synergies.
The Center for Campus Organizing, a national organization of students,
faculty, staff and alumni, unites progressives from many campuses around
struggles against sweatshops, against homophobia, and for affirmative
action, organizing all campus workers, and a variety of other issues
in an international context. And the
widely-publicized TA organizing at Yale, temporarily culminating in
the brutally broken grade strike of 1995-96, taught important lessons
about affiliations with low-status campus workers. The Graduate Employees
and Students Organization (GESO) at Yale affiliated with the universitys
clerical, technical, service and maintenance workers in Locals 34 and
35 of the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union,
and thereby confronted the long-term strategy of Yales trustees,
the aptly-named Yale Corporation, to drive down wages and bust the unions
in New Haven. As the largest employer in New Haven, Yale exploits its
near-monopoly position in regional labor markets, driving local workers
to emigrate for better jobs while buying up cheapened property in the
depressed industrial town; it is preparing to turn New Haven into an
Ivy League theme park for tourists to gawk at and for upper-income Connecticut
to colonize.48
In a letter circulated to all members of the Modern Language Association
in February 1996, Yale Professor Annabel Patterson wrote, Yale
is not prepared to negotiate academic policy, such as the structure
of the teaching program or class size, with the Hotel Employees and
Restaurant Employees International Union...who draw their membership
from the dining workers in the colleges and other support staff.49
At moments like these the brutal class structure of hypercapitalism emerges from behind the bland and pseudocollegial face of the contemporary university. In order to build real solidarity, faculty, graduate assistants and students are going to have to abandon the illusions of status and prestige that compensate for a lack of power. If they build technocratic unions that only protect their own interests, they fail. They can build education-labor coalitions not only by seeing themselves as workers, but by representing the labor movement as educators and intellectuals. A union should have something to say about academic policy, about diverse political issues, and can itself be a public educator; historically, unions have done so.50 The new national academic-labor coalition, Scholars, Artists and Writers for Social Justice, is one good start in this direction. And just the thought of unions running Yale is inspiring. Get a copy of Degrees of Shame, look for its sequel, and use the tapes to organize. Resources and contacts In addition
to sources listed in the notes, the following are useful: The Coalition
of Graduate Student Employee Unions, e-mail cgeu@mgaa.org.
The Center
for Campus Organizing,165 Friend St., #1, Boston, MA 02114, phone (617)
725-2886, fax (617) 725-2873, e-mail cco@igc.org
and web site http://www.cco.org.
The Center publishes an excellent magazine, Infusion. Scholars, Artists, and Writers for Social Justice (SAWSJ), c/o Labor Relations and Research Center, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 125 Draper Hall, Box 32020, Amherst, MA 01003, phone (413) 545-3541, fax (413) 545-0110, e-mail sawsj@lrrc.umass.edu and web site http://www.sage.edu/SAWSJ/ The National Association of Graduate-Professional Students, 207 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE, Washington, D.C. 20003, phone 888-88-NAGPS, e-mail nagps@netcom.com and web site http://www.nagps.org Go
to page 1 2 3
of this essay.
|