Search News


Browse Archives

News

Day 10 on the Picket Line

November 22, 2005

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Striking New York University graduate students  trickled toward the picket line at 8 a.m. Monday, continuing the strike prompted by the university’s decision to end recognition of the graduate student union this summer. There has been no official contact between university and union officials, but strike supporters say their resolve is as strong as ever. Today will be their 10th day on strike.

“I feel good,” said Michael Palm, head of the Graduate Student Organizing Committee,  the local affiliate of the United Auto Workers that represents NYU graduate assistants. “We knew it would take a while, and we’re in it for as long as it takes.”

Because NYU was previously the only private university to recognize a graduate student union, the outcome of the strike is considered important far beyond Greenwich Village. If the union can force NYU to bargain with it, that would provide a strong reinforcement to organizing drives at other private universities, which have largely been beaten back by a decision by the National Labor Relations Board that private universities need not recognize such unions. If NYU prevails, the resolve of other universities to resist unionization may well be strengthened.

Strike leaders said that faculty member support is as strong as ever. They said that requests from supportive faculty members seeking to move classes off-campus have continued to come in, bringing the total number of faculty member requests to around 650. Some courses are already being taught in bars, churches, apartments, and at least one black box theater. Molly Nolan, a history professor, said that, as far as she knows, faculty members who moved their classes off campus when the strike began have kept those courses off campus. Nolan and other faculty members teaching off campus said that, while some students are unhappy about running around the city to class, attendance has mostly been normal.

Neither the university nor the union knows how many of the 165 courses – out of 2,700 total – that use graduate student as the primary instructor have been cancelled. GSOC says it speaks for about 1,000 graduate students, about three-quarters of whom help with courses, in most cases by grading or holding recitation sections.

John Beckman, a spokesman for the university, said that, for students who have had classes cancelled or moved, the disturbance “probably doesn’t feel minor. But, generally, for the university as a whole, that’s how it is.”

One question faculty members are beginning to discuss is how to handle grading. Some faculty members who support the strike do not want to replace the labor of a striking graduate student by taking over grading. Nolan said that faculty members would have to decide how to handle it individually, with one option being to give incompletes. Andrew Ross, a professor of American studies and a strong supporter for the teaching assistants’ union, said that the grading issue “will be the next big debate here. The initial hope was that there would be some movement by the administration in the first week-and-a-half or two.”

Ross added that a recent incident in which the university gave deans access to electronic bulletin boards used by faculty members galvanized faculty support. On the second day of the strike, some faculty members became aware that two deans had been given access to their accounts on Blackboard, a course management system that allows professors to post material and e-mail the class. The university said that departments were consulted before the deans were added to accounts, and that the access was only supposed to be for courses taught primarily by graduate students. Beckman said that the added access in courses taught by faculty members was a technical mistake that was quickly corrected, and that access was removed in other cases where faculty members said it wasn’t needed.

Some faculty interpreted the change as administrative spying and held a teach-in, which drew more than 300 students, to discuss the issue. Ross said that the Blackboard issue “really did outrage a lot of faculty who were hitherto not vocal.”

Undergraduates are also taking an active role. The undergraduate run Graduate/Undergraduate Solidarity Committee, which has had several dozen undergraduates at recent meetings, has called for all undergraduates to play hooky on November 30 to show support for the strike.

So far, no pay has been docked for those on strike, but, with no end in sight, GSOC has been encouraging members to sign up for benefits,  which would kick in if pay checks do start dwindling or disappearing. Striking graduate students would receive $200 a week from the union, in the area of half of what a typical graduate assistant might make, and health care.

In a move that union officials see as an attempt to bait strikers back to the classroom, three deans in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences sent out a memo  Wednesday proposing capping the number of courses that graduate assistants can teach at one per semester. Some graduate assistants currently teach multiple courses in a single semester. Stipends would not change, and the memo says that that the policy, which the deans hope will take effect next semester, would “primarily affect our languages and literature programs.”

Catharine Stimpson, a dean and one of the co-authors, said that standardizing the teaching load at a level that gives graduate students ample time for professional development is something that students and faculty members have long asked for. Stimpson said that, because of the timing of the proposal, she expected to be accused of “offering a carrot” to striking graduate students.

She was right. “I don’t think they’re fooling anybody with that,” Palm said. “The reaction I heard [from graduate assistants] was, ‘if you want to do something like that, let’s bargain about it.’ We’re not in it for less work, we’re in it for a contract.”

Stimpson said that she “wants people to be happy here,” adding that teaching load has always been an academic question, and not part of the previous contract.   

 

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Day 10 on the Picket Line

  • Posted by Melocoton at NYU on November 22, 2005 at 7:04am EST
  • Not so, Dean Stimpson, teaching load WAS negotiated under the last GSOC contract. GSOC negotiated caps on weekly teaching hours as well as were overtime benefits, neither of which ever existed before at NYU.

    GAs are not, I suspect, easily fooled by Dean Stimpson's sudden benevolence nor her preposterous claim that the timing of this announcement is unrelated to the strike. If you want to talk about teaching loads, do it at the bargaining table like last time.

  • Posted by parent of an NYU student on November 22, 2005 at 7:12am EST
  • As a parent paying huge tuition at NYU, with a student who was on the Dean's List, I am dismayed to learn that classes are so easily cancelled. Now, faculty casually contemplate doling out Incomplete grades. How about a refund for the unused portion of the class? How about a formal statement from the same sympathetic faculty to all the grad schools and jobs the students will apply to, saying their Incompletes were not the results of students' slow work, but the faculty member's politics. "Sorry about that." The students are not parties at the bargaining table! They are only bargaining chips there.

  • Andrew Ross Needs Reality Check
  • Posted by Grad Student , Grad student at NYU on November 22, 2005 at 9:46am EST
  • I don't know where Andrew Ross has been lately, but the strike movement at NYU is far from what he represents it to be. Less than half of the more than 400 professors who initially signed a letter urging negotiations between the NYU administration and GSOC were willing to sign Faculty Democracy's paranoid rant about the so-called "electronic surveillance" issue. Faculty Democracy (an organization in which Ross is a founding member) alienates many people because of their self-righteous rhetoric of condemnation. Go join Congress, or something!

    I suspect Andrew Ross is in this because he wants to crank out another one of his quick books about labor issues; only this time, he wants it to be a book that someone will READ. He's taken this self-appointed, messianic, labor-leader role a bit too far. The grad students would be better off with out his interventions, and might actually be able to make progress in their negotiations with NYU's administration.

    There is a process at NYU called then Student Senators' Council. That group of peer-elected students has successfully represented and negotiated student concerns throughout its existence. Why not work within that organization to achieve change?

  • Closure
  • Posted by RIch Godfrey , Adjunct on November 22, 2005 at 10:32am EST
  • NYU Administration:
    This cannon fodder is out on strike and you're STILL PAYING IT? The reason they work for you is you pay them. If you pay them and they don't work, stop paying them! (or is that legal in New York? In New york, if you pay a guy once do you have to keep paying him the rest of his life?) Do you have all your professors on tenure? Man I'd like to be your employee.

  • Closure
  • Posted by Grad Student , Grad Student at NYU on November 22, 2005 at 10:50am EST
  • NYU is still paying the striking grad students because they probably *do* have the financial and personal interests of the strikers in mind. The union, meanwhile, wants striking students to register with *them* and pay them dues to receive "strike compensation" (of $200 per week) if NYU finally pulls the plug.

    If NYU stopped paying the grad students (which is of course precisely what people like Andrew Ross are waiting for), this would be yet another excuse to voice one's moral indignation at the cruel and heartless Admin. Oh, how mean: they stopped paying those pitiful grad students who were not performing their jobs!

    The fact of the matter is that there are no strikers to be seen today. They haven't even kept up their part of the promise to picket every day from 9-5pm.

    I would also like to quickly address Dee's paradoxical comment, "The whole point is that defining the discourse along the commercial, and who has rights as a function of how much money they’ve paid, is a serious problem."

    Uh, let me ask you basic question: how are the strikers defining the discourse of their strike? It is certainly not being defined as a strike about *academic* matters, but rather as a strike about *economic* interests.

    If the strikers took time for one moment to address their union's consistent efforts to interefere in NYU's academic affairs, they would realize that they are promoting discrimination against non-unionized student workers. They are backing a union that wants to tell NYU who can teach or work at NYU: of course that union only wants people who pay dues to the union to have these rights.

  • Posted by Proud GSOC Member , Standalone Instructor at NYU on November 22, 2005 at 12:13pm EST
  • As the instructor of one of the 165 classes that are taught by stand-alone graduate student instructors at NYU (which has been cancelled for the duration of the strike), I want to begin by pointing out that I am working much harder while on strike than I was while my class is in session. Now, I have to stand outside and picket for fifteen hours a week--plus, I have to keep up with my own reading and class planning in the hopes that the strike will end at any given moment, as well as answering many of my students' emails every day.

    We are not striking because it is fun, because we are lazy, or because we want to get out of doing work. We are accepting hard physical labor in the cold and the rain as well as the threat of our income being reduced to half of what we are accustomed to. There are rumors that the administration may begin to reduce or eliminate the fellowships that some of us are entitled to in our non-working years. We accept these risks.

    Why? Because NYU will not even sit down at the bargaining table. NYU, despite all its claims to the contrary, has never made a contract offer with the opportunity for GSOC membership to vote on it. If they think GSOC interferes with academic management, draft a contract that does not allow this to happen, and put it to a vote. Obviously, the goal is not some lofty principle about the ivory tower but rather a concerted attempt to ensure that we have no voice in our working conditions.

    To respond to two previous posters' points:
    1. The student senators council has rarely if ever taken a stand about anything important to the working conditions of graduate students. I have attended their meetings, where the only topics of discussion have been food, parties, inter-school olympics, and furniture in the lounge.

    2. The union has never tried to determine who can and can not be hired at NYU. The incident that most people are referring to when they make this claim actually has to do with graduate students who are paid as TAs one semester, and then rehired (the same students) to do the same exact job and paid as adjuncts. Adjuncts make a little less than half of what TAs make and do not have health insurance. This is not about acadmic management. It is about fair pay.

    If you care about getting back to work, about the undergraduates' educations (my students, by the way, are very supportive), and about putting an end to this struggle--NO MATTER WHICH SIDE YOU ARE ON--urge the administration to at least make an offer. We are willing to negotiate on pretty much any issue of concern. They are willing to negotiate on nothing.

  • Economics
  • Posted by Kevin , Undergraduate on November 22, 2005 at 2:02pm EST
  • I assume you are not a graduate student of economics. (I certainly hope not.)

    Vote with your feet if conditions are so bad. Why should the university have any desire to negociate with your movement?

    NYU, stop trying to negociate and fire these weasels.

  • Posted by Grad Student , Grad Student at NYU on November 22, 2005 at 2:03pm EST
  • "To respond to two previous posters’ points:1. The student senators council has rarely if ever taken a stand about anything important to the working conditions of graduate students. I have attended their meetings, where the only topics of discussion have been food, parties, inter-school olympics, and furniture in the lounge."

    Dear fellow NYU grad,

    Contrary to your claim that Students' Councils at NYU spend their time talking about food and furniture, there are now two groups of graduate students, all selected by their fellow students -- the Graduate Student Working Group, and the Committee on Graduate Affairs -- working hard to perfect the frameworks around grievances, rights, responsibilities and all other matters that affect graduate student life here. The issues on the table include health benefits and stipends.

    Last week, members of the Graduate Student Working Group met with GOSC leader Mike Palm in what was supposed to be a "neutral, off-campus location" to discuss post-strike modes of negotiating graduate students' grievances. It turns out the Grad Students Working Group was misled by Mike Palm: the meeting took place at the UAW headquarters. This is not bargaining in good faith with people who are trying to help, and in a position to help. This is simply acting in an inappropriate way, which is consistent with the general act of striking and failing to uphold one's responsibilities.

    I'm sorry that it's more work to be on strike than to do your job as a TA.

    I appreciate your duress, and realize that the union is asking its student members to picket NYU three times a week for 5 hours a day, *and* to work 5 additional hours a week in the headquarters. That's a lot of work to put into the union, and I'm sure they are delighted to have your free labor, as well as the free publicity you are generating for them.

    Perhaps (given the massive lay-offs announced yesterday in the field of auto manufacturing), you might consider finding a new union to represent your rights? They are obviously not doing much to help autoworkers. But I'm glad you're proud to give them your time and money.

    For those interested, below is a document briefly outlining the union's persistent efforts to interfere in academic matters that are solely the jurisdiction of the university:

    http://www.nyu.edu/provost/ga/uaw-grievances.html

    This is just a glimmer of the alleged "grievances" that have been leveled at NYU: grievances that have *nothing* to do with the economic issues faced by TAs and GAs. Rather, these "grievances" are geared towards pressuring NYU to employ *only* union members, so that the union can pocket more of our money for their causes.

    I sincerely encourage you to trust NYU's administration and the Student Senators' Council. Last year alone, this partnership promptly addressed students' concerns about human rights abuses at Coca-Cola,implemented a bill of gender/transgendered rights on campus, developed the Wellness Exchange program addressing issues of student health, and initiated a wide range of other initiatives geared towards improving student life on campus.

    I think this is a fundamental 'disconnect' that union members have: they lack ties to the administration beyond the hostile ones they have groundlessly manufactured.

  • Posted by Ryan , I agree, Kevin at A good one, with no union on November 22, 2005 at 3:08pm EST
  • Fire them! In fact, I'll go further and say there is no place in education for unions. They have long outlived their purpose. In fact, just look who they're represented by, the United Auto Workers?! Sounds like the UAW needed more union dues.

  • Posted by Legal Joker on November 23, 2005 at 4:58am EST
  • The position of NYU is absurd, and this problem won't be solved until they recognise the right of teaching assistants to join a union.

    The NYU administration is persisting with its claim that teaching assistants aren't "workers" but simply students. So Rich and Ryan, the administration can't stop "paying" or "fire" TAs for not doing their "work", because, it claims, it's giving "students" just "scholarships" or "financial assistance". If it admitted it was giving "pay" for "work", then the teaching assstants would be "workers" and would have the right to join a union.

  • Posted by Melocoton , NYU Grad student on November 23, 2005 at 7:52am EST
  • Dear "Grad Student": Your position on the student council is so absurd, and so obviously self-indulgent, that it hardly needs answering.

    As for the claim, which echoes the administration of NYU, that GSOC interfered in "academic affairs" by filing grievances, you offer the provost's website for the proof. But look at the link: there are only TWO grievances cited as evidence for this claim. You then say this is only a "glimmer" of all the examples--but if there was any more evidence for this accusation, NYU surely would have come up with it by now, don't you think? It's an empty claim, and you know it. GSOC filed grievances over its members' pay, benefits, and safety (think recitation sections in asbestos-filled classrooms).

  • Posted by Grad Student , Grad Student at NYU on November 23, 2005 at 1:14pm EST
  • You asked for more examples of how the union has persistently *failed* to uphold its promise not to interfere in NYU's academic matters. Below are several more examples of grievances brought forth by the union.

    http://www.nyu.edu/provost/ga/internal.html

    II. Grievances. I would like to now give you some sense of the matters we have been dealing with in grievances and how they have progressed through the ed through the grievance step process. Please note
    that this is not a full list, but is intended to give you a representative overview.

    1. (2002) This grievance involved the Anthropology Department’s decision not to hire an individual student as a teaching assistant, grieving our policy regarding the number of years a student is eligible
    for financial aid. This was denied by the University at step 3 and not taken to arbitration.

    4. (2003) This grievance involved the Hebrew and Judaic Studies Department decision to hire a student from Wagner as an adjunct and not a teaching assistant. This was taken to arbitration and the
    union withdrew the grievance half way through the proceedings, after it completed its testimony.

    5. (2003-2004) This grievance involved the Politics Department hiring students from outside the GraduateSchool as adjuncts and not teaching assistants. This was taken to arbitration and resolved in favor of
    the University.

    6. (2004) This grievance involved the Politics Department and MAP making the decision not to offer an individual student a position as a teaching assistant. This is still in progress and going to arbitration.

    7. (2004) This grievance involved the Music
    Department’s decision to award funds through their endowment, as an award to supplement the base stipend for their fellowship or teaching assistantship. The union claimed the endowed fellowship should be considered salary and be subject to the terms of the contract. This went
    through Step 3, and the grievance was denied by University. The union did not take it to arbitration.

    8. (2005) The grievance involved the Psychology Department’s decision not to include certain assistants in the bargaining unit. This is still in
    progress and going directly to arbitration without any discussion at Steps 2 or 3.

  • Adjuncts Getting Paid the Same Amount as Grad Students???
  • Posted by Grad Student , Grad Student at NYU on November 23, 2005 at 1:14pm EST
  • To the Proud GSOC Member,

    You said yesterday that part of the union's concern was making sure that adjuncts get paid the same amount as TAs and GAs for the same work. You also said that adjuncts at NYU don't have a health care plan.

    I don't know if you aware of this, but the Adjuncts and their union negotiated a very favorable contract for full-time adjuncts several years ago: they *do* have health care packages now, including health care subsidies for family members. What their union *doesn't* have (which the UAW can't seem to grasp) is the right to interfere in NYU's academic decisions and affairs.

    Moreover, I want to respond to your strange assumption that adjuncts should get paid the same amount as funded graduate students. Alas, adjuncts who want the same compensation for their labor as they received in grad school (through scholarships and stipends) should apply for post-docs or tenure-track jobs.

    When a graduate student ceases to be a graduate student, their scholarships also cease. Grad students do not receive scholarships for grading papers or teaching recitations, but rather to allow them to devote their time to their academic pursuits.

    When a grad student becomes an adjunct, the university is no longer paying them to focus on their scholarship, but rather paying them to teach and grade papers, and fulfill the general duties of an adjunct.

    This is in no way to diminish the extremely valuable roles played by adjuncts at NYU, but simply to point out that NYU does not offer scholarships/stipends to adjuncts. I don't know of many universities that do. Do you?

  • Posted by GSOC Member on November 24, 2005 at 6:18am EST
  • To Grad Student at NYU: The point that my fellow GSOC Member was making regarding NYU reclassifying TA positions into adjunct positions is that as adjuncts, these grad students would not get the healthcare benefits offered under the adjunct union contract. In fact, it is often the case that grad students teaching sections in reclassified adjunct positions are not even covered by the collective bargaining agreement of the adjunct union, because they do not teach enough hours to qualify. It is in NYU's best interest to find cheaper labor for these positions, and create positions that fall outside of both union contracts, while using the defensive rubric that everything is couched as "funding" or financial aid. Teaching recitation sections is generally rarely done by adjuncts - it is a job description, through past practice, that has become associated distinctly with the work that teaching assistants do.

    And it is patently unjust to have two equally qualified grad students working alongside one another where one is getting paid 18,000 plus healthcare benefits, while the other, for doing the same exact work, gets 5,000 without these benefits. You can use whatever NYU admin spin you want. But it comes down to a principle of justice - equal pay for equal work.

    What NYU is slowly doing is called erosion, where bargaining unit jobs are replaced by cheaper labor that is not covered by the contract. When we first bargained the contract, we had an estimated 1300 GAs, and now they are barely 1000. This speaks to a reduction in decent paying and protected union jobs for grad students.

    And in fact, in the department that I am in at NYU, the department is known to consider adjunct teaching positions as a substandard form of "funding" for ABD grad students, because we do not have as strong of a fellowship package in place as that offered in many other GSAS departments.

    And why shouldn't adjuncts get paid on par with grad assistants? Perhaps that would convince universities to hire less adjuncts and create more tenure track positions. Adjuncts have every right, as do grad employees, to demand better pay and benefits, when these are the workers who are teaching the majority of undergraduate classes at most universities.

    To address your grievance concerns: NYU is only raising these grievances as a weak excuse not to bargain with us. If there were no Brown decision in 2004 that came down from the Bush stacked NLRB, we would have negotiated a second contract by now.

    But if you want to get down to the nitty grity of the grievances, many of those you cite concerned the reclassification of TA work into lower paid positions not covered by the contract, and often not covered by the adjunct union contract either. We have a right to seek clarification for these cases through the grievance procedure, particularly when members come to us with these problems and feel they have been treated unfairly. And the union is obliged to represent those members of the bargaining unit that opt out of union membership as well. Having a contract clearly benefits everyone whose position is covered by it.

    And in fact, as a true show of compromise, GSOC offered this past summer to withdraw the grievances that NYU felt were an obstacle to bargaining a second contract: NYU refused. Instead NYU offered a take-it-or-leave-it "unilateral" offer that would leave all power in the hands of the provost in respects to grievances, and wouldn't even give us adequate say in economic issues, if you read their letter closely. GSOC was still willing to meet and bargain face to face, but NYU closed the door on negotiations, as it had to be "their way or the highway." It was a bogus offer and no one saw it as anything but that. NYU should be leading the way in terms of establishing fair working conditions and negotiating a second contract with GSOC, rather than wasting time and money on union busting.

    Sincerely,

    Another GSOC Member

  • NYU retaliation applies to untenured faculty
  • Posted by Striker , TA at NYU on November 24, 2005 at 6:14pm EST
  • For professor denied tenure at NYU: supported unionizing

    A former professor was denied tenure because he supported the Teaching Assistnat’s right to unionize. read his story here:

    http://www.louisville.edu/journal/workplace/westheimer.html

    and here:

    http://www.louisville.edu/journal...ace/issue5p2/bousquetwestheimer.html

  • Posted by Grad Student , Grad Student at NYU on November 26, 2005 at 4:54pm EST
  • I'm responding to the previous poster:

    "And why shouldn’t adjuncts get paid on par with grad assistants? Perhaps that would convince universities to hire less adjuncts and create more tenure track positions."

    It saddens me that so many of you involved in the strike movement obviously have no clue regarding anything that goes on at NYU. Here is some information about the Partners' Fund initiative, launced last year to do exactly what you call for above. This fund will allow for 250 new professors to be hired at NYU in the next five years.

    http://www.nyu.edu/nyutoday/archives/18/02/PageOneStories/campaign-remarks.html

    As the university hires more and more tenure-track faculty to teach undergrad courses, and as students grow increasingly wary of enrolling in those very few classes (165 out of many thousands)where graduate student TAs or Adjuncts are the primary instructors, those who continue to disrupt classes with their strike will likely find themselves with surprisingly little to do.

    Undergraduates are surprisingly saavy at planning their schedules for next semester. They are also surprisingly good at asking astute questions about *who* is teaching the courses they need. I will leave it at that.

    Finally, while it would be nice if graduate students could get their TA or GA funding extended indefinately, that is simply not how it works at NYU, or anywhere else. When your funding runs out, the onus is on you to find employment that allows you to continue your studies and support yourself. Adjunct positions are not "substandard' funding; they are open to anyone, including people who were never NYU graduate students funded by the university.

    The UAW is seeking to redefine "Adjunct" as "Advanced graduate student who has run out of funding yet still wants to get paid the same amount as they did during those years when the funding was in effect."

    The UAW is also trying to define what NYU's priorities should be. Meanwhile, as is clear from the Partners' Fund initiative, NYU is aware of its priorities. Those priorities include the need for committed, fulltime, quality teaching.

    However, as you will see in reading the PArtners' Fund press release, those priorities also include more scholarships for graduate students. In short, many of the problems this strike purports to confront are already being confronted internally. Patience is needed, however, because all change takes time.

  • Tenure
  • Posted by Grad Student , Grad Student at NYU on November 26, 2005 at 4:55pm EST
  • To Striker,

    Many people don't get tenure, and there are many reasons why this happens. I've known several bright, productive, well-liked, excellent teachers like Westheimer who also had their tenure applications denied, both inside and outside of NYU.

    NYU wants committed, congenial community members and scholars who will make teaching their top priority. They don't want solo mavericks, even if they are academic superstars. It's NYU's academic freedom to decide who is performing within the ballpark of what they want in a professor, and who is building a ballpark of their own.

    And who knows? Maybe Westheimer's position on the strike was just one facet of NYU's growing discomfort with his prospects as a future faculty member? Perhaps they didn't appreciate his rumpled khaki trousers? Why can't some very intelligent people learn to iron their clothes? :)

    Seriously: it would be a shame if Westheimer was not awarded tenure strictly on the ground that he testified in favor of the students' right to unionize. However, I respect the university's decision to reevaluate their sense of his commitments and priorities. How can you be committed to teaching when you are actively promoting a strike?

    His whole commentary about how he doesn't really "mentor" his TAs, but rather gets them to fix his computer and return books to the library, is also kind of odd. I TA'd for several years (non-union) at NYU. In my experience, my faculty employer went out of his way to create interesting projects for me: projects directly in line with my interests and skills.

    Since he was not my professor or dissertation advisor, he did not "mentor" me about my academic work unless I specifically asked him to do so. However, *whenever* I asked him to do so, he was always absolutely willing to help. His conduct as an employer was certainly a form of "mentoring."

    I wish everyone could have the same experience I had as a TA, instead of the disappointing scenario that Westheimer inscribes. Perhaps that reflects more on *his* vision of what his role is as an employer/role model than on NYU as an evil terminator of dreams?

  • the day tenure track jobs replace those adjunct and TA positions
  • Posted by cuny prof at BMCC on December 2, 2005 at 7:14pm EST
  • Will be the day when grad students are really STUDENTS and not employees. Given the state of higher ed today, it will also be the day that HELL freezes over. The person who posted that the grad students and adjuncts will be shocked to find themselves replaced by thousands? of new tenure-track faculty if they keep up this strike must be living in a fantasy world. If that were the result of the strike it would be a huge victory.
    Unfortunately, as the proud GSOC members on this discussion board point out, TAs and adjuncts are doing a lot teaching at low pay because the University is cheap and unwilling to pay for full-time tenure-track faculty. It's because of this trend nation-wide that people no longer are able to find good jobs after graduating with advanced degrees.