NYU Grads — Spoiled Brats?

As an NYU alumna, I was an undergrad when the grad students were striking and whining the first time around. Yes Manhattan is an expensive place to live, and yes healthcare costs are high but that is a reality for all in NYC. Let’s look at what GA’s at NYU receive:The financial aid package is worth some $50,000 dollars per year for doctoral students carrying a full course load, including:

a full tuition scholarship (the value of which for most students ranges from $25,183-$33,880 per year) a minimum stipend of $19,000/year for doctoral students ($14,000 for masters students) 100% payment by NYU of the premiums for the student health insurance plan for each GA (approximately $2,000)(For fully-supported graduate students, this same financial aid package applies even in those semesters in which graduate students do not have assistantship duties).

On average, a graduate assistant is expected to spend about 20 hours per week during a 30-week year satisfying the requirements of his or her assistantship, typically through teaching or research related to his or her degree. -from the NYU website

I don’t know about others, but I pay for my grad school and have a full-time job teaching at a public school. It doesn’t sound to me like the GAs at NYU have it that bad. As far as the undergrads joining in, that was typical of some students during my time at NYU. It seems to be the nature of certain students that choose to come to the University—they enjoy protesting for the sake of protesting, whether it’s about soda pop, politics, or the food in the cafeteria.

I worked with many of the University admins as a Student Senator and I think they are on target in their decisions concerning the graduate students; NYU is a great place to go to school and the education students get there will likely take them far, perhaps the GAs and TAs need reminded of this.

Jessica Morey, University of Florida, at 8:47 am EST on December 1, 2005

The Big Picture

Again, we see misrepresentations of what graduate students are actually doing for their pay, and what that pay amounts to. Graduate assistants don’t work “20 hours per week"—they work full-time, training for the profession upon which all higher education depends. That includes the teaching, scholarship, classroom time, and examinations. And, in many cases, it also includes advising, mentoring, departmental participation, and job-searching as well. For this, they are given $19,000 to live on...in Manhattan! Try paying rent and bills, buying groceries, getting to and from work, buying books, clothing, and basic necessities, or covering emergency costs like travel or un-insured medical care on that salary anywhere in the country, much less one of the most expensive cities in the world! “Tuition remission” is not a paycheck—it’s the cost to the institution of training its own workforce. Corporations don’t get to count the training budget as part of an employees salary. Now everyone here wants to claim that only the classroom time is part of the GAs “employment"—but that’s a blatant misrepresentation or misunderstanding of what graduate education is about. Just as every aspect of their work is a part of their “education,” every aspect is also a part of their “job.”

“But I had to do it too.” “But I held down a part-time job and went to school.” “But this is the way it’s always been done.” Nonsense. Previous generations of scholars weren’t expected to meet the same requirements for employment as current PhDs, either in terms of scholarship or teaching. Generations of scholars never stepped into a classroom until they got their first jobs, and many never published a book until a decade into their careers. No one today could survive such a slow pace. GAs are expected to publish like scholars and teach like faculty and still be full-time students. Side jobs are not only impossible to manage, but usually forbidden by their fellowship contracts. Unless there’s money coming from outside (family, inheritance, independent wealth) or massive debts incurred (which, unlike legal and medical careers, will NOT be paid off on an academic salary), many students are simply financially screwed.

This last point evokes the danger that we should all be concerned about: that higher education is becoming increasingly impossible for those from lower- and middle-income families. There’s a lot of talk about “diversifying” higher education along political lines. That will never happen so long as it remains the prerogative of the economically privileged. If graduate students cannot count on the support of the very institutions that they’re training to serve, then they’ll just (as one of the writers above so glibly puts it) “find another profession.” Is this what we want? A profession dominated by a few wealthy elite individuals who were able to “struggle” through graduate school? Labor disputes have social and political consequences as well as economic ones.

huntly, at 11:43 am EST on December 1, 2005

Life is NOT funded via ATM

” .. higher education is becoming increasingly impossible for those from lower- and middle-income families .. “

Hmm .. isn’t that a bit ’90s ..

http://www.unc.edu/news/archives/sept04/covenant092904.html

Here’s a newsflash: there is NOT an unlimited amount of money available to allow every U.S. college student to study whatever she/he wants. There is not a country in the world that allows that.

In fact, there are a lot of people who think the U.S. has one of the most “liberal” approaches towards allowing higher education to go where it wants. (If there was such another country, students would flock there.)

Concerned about U.S. student loans? Hey — most countries don’t even ALLOW such high-risk borrowing! You live in the social class, you were born into.

Choices get made. You can either make them yourself, on an informed, rational basis — or let someone make them for you. Your decision.

IMHO, I wouldn’t hold my breath, hoping the U.S. public is going to fund higher education without any limitations. You’d be better off, reading books of interest, on your own.

A.D., at 12:55 pm EST on December 1, 2005

p.s.

AD: No one has asked for graduate funding for “every college student"—only for those accepted into graduate programs. The university has already vetted its candidates according to merit and their own departmental needs (which includes their teaching needs, though no school wants to admit that they take more students than they can place for precisely this purpose), and supposedly made a commitment to educating those students and helping to place them. If you can’t afford to fully support them, don’t accept them in the first place. Let them choose other professions because that’s what they’re better suited for, not because they’ve been misled about the possibility of support. $19,000 always sounds attractive and do-able to a college-kid who’s never lived on their own in a major city with adult expenses and responsibilities. As does the prospect of living on credit and loans. Should they be smarter in choosing their path? Sure. But exploiting them in the name of economic expediency is simply irresponsible on the part of universities. If universities are serious about training this generation of scholars, they have to make the economic investment in doing it right.

huntly, at 1:24 pm EST on December 1, 2005

Know What’s REALLY Sad?

Hey Huntly,

You know what’s REALLY sad? The fact that only 39 undergraduate students out of the 39,000 students at NYU (predominantly undergraduates) signed the petition delivered to Sexton. That’s actually hilarious!

Shows you how much these young people sympathize with the union and their TA instructors.

The GAs who don’t go back to work can have fun living in NYC without their stipends!

Middle Class Grad Student, Grad Student at NYU, at 2:45 pm EST on December 1, 2005

strikers with Coach bags

Nothing like watching spoiled NYU undergrads pretend to care about the downtrodden. I bet the strike, filled with “Coach” bags was really heart-wrenching.

Larry, at 3:49 pm EST on December 1, 2005

Is “graduate student” a job title?

Huntly writes: ‘Now everyone here wants to claim that only the classroom time is part of the GAs “employment"—but that’s a blatant misrepresentation or misunderstanding of what graduate education is about. Just as every aspect of their work is a part of their “education,” every aspect is also a part of their “job.” ’

I find this rather shocking. I recently received a Ph.D. from an institution at which nearly no one gets full tuition remission, and fellowships are small and few. As a result, I both took out loans to pay for school and worked basically full-time for the eight years I was a student. (I currently teach as an adjunct, work another job, and am looking for a tenure track position. Let me note as well that I live in NYC.)

On Huntly’s logic, I am either a fool or have been ripped off. But this is insane. Graduate training (i.e., going to classes, participating in seminars, writing papers, etc.) is not something for which one should be paid — most especially because it benefits no one except oneself. To suggest otherwise is exceedingly arrogant. And to get the opportunity to receive such training without paying for it is something that should be valued. I am continually surprised at how supporters of the NYU strike act as if tuition remission is meaningless.

I admit that the landscape of academia, in terms of the publishing and teaching experience required to get a job, is rather difficult these days. But I fail to see how this translates into a demand for money.

Call me an idealist, but if you cannot make sacrifices for a life of the mind, you will never be happy as a college professor.

Matt, at 7:36 pm EST on December 1, 2005

you people make me sick

Who is this AD idiot? someone might want to remind him/her that in most civilized countries students don’t need to take out massive loans because higer education (and for that matter health care) are subsidized by the federal government. Decrying those of us who are deeply concerned about NYU’s policies towards it GA’s as “spoiled brats” is outrageous. The stuggle of workers over the power of collective bargaining is important in all fields—factory workers, plumbers,mechanics, student-teachers. It is (Still) a right in this country for a group of workers to decide to unionize and anyone who does not consider GA’s and TA’s workers simply is not familiar with the situation. But worst of all is this fuck who says that NYU kids will demonsrate over anything, even “soda-pop.” I presume this was a reference to the “killer-coke” campaign, of which many of the same hard-working undergrads who are involved with this strike were also involved. Perhaps the person who wrote that thinks that killing union organizers and their families is ok. I personally met with Columbians who have had friends and family members killed in the coca-cola bottling factory, and I’m quite sure they didn’t see the actions that took place at NYU last year as a bunch of spoiled brats protesting about “soda pop.”Lastly, I agree that the deal that GA’s currently have is pretty good, but that is only the result of gains made when they were recognized as a union. As a self proclaimed “liberal” institution NYU ought to practice what it preaches and respect the right of all of its workers to unionize, and you people who attack those of us who take time out of our lives to help those workers fight....well you ought to go back to working for Dick Cheney or some other monster.

mark stulberg, at 1:33 pm EST on December 2, 2005

Some clarifications and thoughts

Wow. This these comments are getting quite heated, personal and a little strange.

AD, why is it that i don’t understand half the things you write about? jane fonda fund our education? Federal Government/ ATM? Tonto, as in spanish for stupid or as in the lone rangers side kick? I guess your just too witty for me.

Any way. I just wanted to explain why I think that a Grad-Student Worker Union is important for me and everyone else attending NYU. On a larger level, this is about democracy and representation at the university. I suppose the benefits of democratic process can and have been debated. Some folks on this comment stream have exclaimed that democratic process does not belong at the university. I think it does. Working and learning conditions improved substantially after the union was established 3 years ago. The numbers that Jessica Morey sited are representative of what the union was able to secure for grad students. Before the union, TA’s and RA’s were paid approximately 40% less than they are now. They also did not have health care or limits on the sizes of their classes. It was not until after the union was introduced to the university that they were given these benefits. As an undergraduate, I have a vested interest in preserving these excellent working conditions (which are a product of union representation) because it means my TA’s will have the resources, time and energy to service me with the quality education I pay for.

Thats all for now. i dont want to waste too much time on this comment. I doubt very many people will read it or take it seriosly any way. Most of the personalities on here seem pretty set in their ideas and unwilling to see things from another perspective.

Canek, student and worker at nyu, at 3:48 pm EST on December 2, 2005

Dude — you’re living in a very expensive city!

Dude .. maybe this will help ..

An acquaintance’s wife demanded they live in San Diego, a very expensive city like NYC is. They just declared bankruptcy — too expensive for their working-class incomes. If they had lived outside California, they’d probably be middle-class. Their choice — their consequences.

You voluntarily chose to work in one of the most expensive cities in the world. That is your responsibility and no one else’s. Please either live with your choice or leave — complaining is not going to change anyone’s mind.

Why should anyone help support your life in one of the world’s most expensive cities? It’s not like NYU is Harvard or Stanford, either.

There is not an unlimited amount of money for people who want to live in NYC, Boston, WDC, Atlanta, Miami, LA, SF, et al. As the late Ann Landers would say, “wake up and smell the coffee.”

A.D., at 4:29 pm EST on December 2, 2005

Dude, where’s my paycheck?

Dude, graduate students don’t just get to “choose” to live in a less expensive place just to avoid the financial strain of going to school. Graduate programs are not interchangeable—you go where the program you need is offered, where you’re accepted, where you’re offered the best deal, or where you can manage to move (many people are limited by geography, family obligations and jobs, and other considerations). This is the same mentality that tells critics of the government to just “love it or leave it", or poor New Orleanians to stop living in a dangerous city. In each of these cases, the attitude is arrogant and unfeasible. Citizens, residents, and students alike have the right to seek reform in the institutions that they’re a part of, and no obligation whatsoever to leave just to make everyone happy.

On the other hand, graduate programs do “choose” their students, and supposedly make a commitment to seeing them through the program and helping to place them in jobs. Again, if they can’t afford to do that, then cut back on the number of students accepted and given aid. Cut back on the number of classes taught by GAs, hire more full-time or adjunct faculty, and shift more money to those areas (humanities and social sciences) that don’t have as much access to outside funding to pay for its graduate students. Do what’s necessary to support the students that the university clearly needs to perform its function.

As for the taxpayers, yes, they should help finance the education of new scholars, just as they help finance the salaries of their children’s elementary and secondary school teachers. These are the people who’ll be teaching their own children (or at least those who are capable of going to college), and it’s the cost of having a university in your state or city. If taxpayers don’t want a fully-functioning university, then they can vote for the next candidate who offers to dismantle the state universities. Good luck with that. If you’re going to have a university at all, do it right.

huntly, at 6:28 pm EST on December 2, 2005

I was a graduate student (PhD) at NYU during the first contract negotiation and I think there are some things to set straight. Firstly — for those of you talking about getting part-time jobs, you are clearly in different programs from mine, I worked 10-14 hours a day, 6 or 7 days of every week for 5 and a half years to get my degree. There is simply no time for having another job — that is why graduate students have to be paid SOMETHING, it is a stipend and it is hardly a goldmine. The $19,000 quoted here is the INCREASED stipend that resulted from our early bargaining efforts. This is why the right to bargain is so critical. One person also writes that grad students shouldn’t get paid because we are the only ones who benefit from our work. That is not true, the research we conduct brings in government grants and the university claims a percentage of those grants, in fact NYU claims a higher fraction of its scientists’ grants than any other university in NY state, this university CANNOT RUN without the research its labs produce and that research is largely conducted by graduate students. Further, with respect to teaching in particular, it is more obviously not true that only the student gains. When we teach, the university benefits, in fact the entire institutional structure is based on a model in which graduate students take some of the burden of teaching. It is true that we learn about how to teach as we do it — but who said that a person is only an employee if they get no benefit from their work other than remuneration? TAing and doing research is a mutually beneficial arrangement between graduate students and the university, that doesn’t mean we don’t need to eat. Before the contract, some graduate TAs had *NO* health insurance and stipends below $15 000 a year — no one can live in NY for that amount. And many of us are in academic fields that will not alow us to service large loans on completion of our degrees so it simply isn’t possible to put ourselves through school that way. No one is trying to turn graduate school into a cash cow, the $19000 we won in the last contrast was adequate, the students are not asking to be made rich, what they are asking for is the right to continue negotiating to ensure their conditions remain at their current standard (there is a real risk here of erosion of conditions — the insurance coverage for this year, without union contract, offers substantially reduced coverage compared with the previous year).The question here is whether graduate students should be allowed to negoiate to ensure adequate conditions for themselves — while going to school is certainly a priviledge, for which I am profoundly grateful, there has to be some base standard of living which we deem acceptable for someone willing to put in a sixty+ hour working week. That person MUST have adequate health insurance coverage and income sufficient to provide themselves with food and shelter and the other necessities of life (trust me, on $19000 in NY, it’s only necessities we get!). They must also have the right to negiotiate to secure those things, in any graduate school they can get into. Anything less, from the ‘land of opportunity’, is shameful.

Anita, NYU, at 8:24 pm EST on December 6, 2005