Search News


Browse Archives

News

Trying to Raise the Stakes at NYU

April 28, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Graduate students at New York University -- on strike for months in hopes of saving their union -- got support Thursday from the outgoing and incoming presidents of the American Association of University Professors, who were arrested for disorderly conduct for blocking a street in front of NYU.

Cary Nelson, the incoming president and a professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said in an interview before his arrest (and that of Jane Buck, the departing president) that he saw Thursday's actions as a "ramping up of resistance" to NYU. More than 50 others were also arrested, most of them NYU graduate students, plus a few graduate students from other institutions.

While many leaders of faculty groups have backed the NYU grad students with resolutions and statements, Nelson said it was important to go beyond that. "We're here to put our bodies where our words have been -- to signal to our membership that this is a cause worthy of the long, honorable tradition of civil disobedience, that this is a fundamental issue of employee rights, and in truth this is the watershed academic labor crisis of our generation," he added.

Nelson said that he was planning a "personal boycott" of NYU and that he would soon be encouraging other faculty members nationally to consider steps similar to those he will take, such as refusing to serve on NYU tenure review or publication review committees, refusing to speak on the campus, advising students against enrolling at graduate school or seeking employment there, and generally having "no active relationship" with the university. He said that the graduate students' work stoppage alone -- which is now rather modest as many of the students have returned to work -- will not win the strike, but that a more unified effort could do so.

"People need to start making moral decisions about what to do," said Nelson.

The conflict at NYU is over the right of graduate students at private institutions to unionize. Until last year, NYU was the only private institution to recognize a union, and it did so based on a National Labor Relations Board ruling that graduate students at private universities were entitled to engage in collective bargaining. But the NLRB reversed itself, giving NYU the legal right to stop dealing with the union. Officials of the university, which greatly expanded pay and benefits for TA's under the union contract and after ending the university's relationship with the union, said that collective bargaining ran counter to the university's educational mission.

The NYU battle has been closely watched by graduate students elsewhere. At NYU and other private institutions, administrations have responded to the push to unionize with better stipends and benefits -- and while university officials say that they are committed to keeping such improvements, some students are skeptical and scoff at the idea that collective bargaining touches on academic issues.

Leaders of other private universities were generally upset with NYU for dealing with the union -- an affiliate of the United Automobile Workers -- in the first place, and have been hoping that the defeat of the strike would quash the union movement among graduate students. (Unions for teaching assistants at public institutions are governed by state labor laws, and in states like New York, Michigan and California, such representation is common and is not affected by NLRB rulings.)

John Beckman, an NYU spokesman, said that Thursday's arrests would have no impact on the university's position. He stressed that "all but a tiny percentage" of teaching assistants are working and that the semester's classes are "going forward as usual."

He also defended the general principles under which the university decided to stop dealing with the UAW. "Today's efforts by the union seek to challenge core academic principles -- such as the university's right to choose who will be in front of a class of students, or how long a course of study should take," Beckman said. "No university would permit such matters to be taken out of the hands of itself and its faculty. In this regard we stand with every private university in the United States. We will not compromise our principles because of staged arrests."

Asked about Nelson's suggestion that professors everywhere consider boycotts of NYU, Beckman wondered whether Nelson and others would apply any boycotts to all private universities, since they share NYU's position on graduate student unions. (Nelson said in an interview after he was released by authorities that NYU was "the center of the struggle" and was an appropriate focus because its graduate students had voted for a union.)

Beckman added, however: "What's really striking to me is that every tactic the union and its supporters embrace seems to share two characteristics -- they're not effective and they are very anti-undergraduate. It's a strong illustration of why unionization is a bad fit for graduate education."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Trying to Raise the Stakes at NYU

  • Posted by Zeke on April 28, 2006 at 8:20am EDT
  • How said that the AAUP has sunk to this level, and what a stunning lack of judgment its leaders have shown. Are there serious issues about the status of graduate teaching assistants in this country? Of course, and they deserve serious consideration. But the leadership the professoriate needs are not immature and polarizing activists, but rather thoughtful scholars who will lead a nuanced and balanced dialogue about these issues.

  • Posted by another professor elsewhere , Ph. D. at SUNY on April 28, 2006 at 8:20am EDT
  • Dismayed to see AAUP in this. Such action does not have my vote or support, and I am uninterested in such foolish calls for action as Professor Nelson suggests. Has he noticed there are faculty at NYU as well? Most of them do not favor this so called union action, either.

  • Stand fast
  • Posted by David on April 28, 2006 at 8:35am EDT
  • I wanted to take this opportunity to express my solidarity...with NYU. Good for you. Students are students, not employees, even if you are generous enough to give them a stipend and teaching experience.

    Shouldn't the fact that the students in question were being represented by the United AUTO Workers be a cue that something is out of whack?

  • Posted by Leo Casey , Special Representative at United Federation of Teachers on April 28, 2006 at 9:45am EDT
  • A "respectful dialogue"?

    Surely this is some sort of bad joke, coming as it does, as a suggestion on how to deal with a university administration which set out to bust the union of graduate assistants and which has refused to bargain in good faith with them.

    Maybe if the NYU administration took their boot off of the neck of the graduate assistants, such a dialogue might be possible.

  • Good for Prof. Nelson and strikers!
  • Posted by Grover Furr , Associate Professor of English and Comp. Lit. at Montclair State University on April 28, 2006 at 10:35am EDT
  • Bush and the Neocon imperialists tell us: The terrorists envy our freedom." What "freedom"? For the vast majority of "we the people," the United States is neither democratic nor free.

    It's past time American academics began to teach the basic truths about the lack of basic rights in the USA for the majority of the population.

    The United States is very far from the "Land of the Free." Of all the industrialized countries in the world, the rights of working people are fewest, and our remaining rights more under attack, here in the USA.

    The right to strike, ike the right to organize collectively on the job, and the right to a job itself, is a basic human right, recognized in industrialized countries the world over -- EXCEPT in the United States.

    For example, the right to strike has been guaranteed in France since the 1860s, and has been in the French Constitution since WW2.

    Of course it is good that the NYU graduate students demand the right to collectively bargain as employees! And of course it is right that the AAUP should support them in this! What is outrageous is that this right would be denied in the first place.

    Curbs on the rights of employees to organize, bargain collectively, and strike in their self-interest against their employers, whether private or public, are fascist derogations of their human rights. They are also a threat to ALL employees' rights -- to the vast majority of the American public.

    That the neocons, and the Republican Party generally, are thinly-disguised ideological apologists for employers, ought to be more widely recognized. Of course they should be exposed as the supporters of exploitation and the enemies of the liberties and freedoms of the vast majority of the population that they are.

    But many or most well-known liberals deny employees these basic rights as well, while often posing as friends of workers, supporters of social-welfare.

    Without the right to strike an employee is one step away from slavery. No law that infringes on the right to strike is democratic, no matter what the process by which it was arrived at.

    The USA has "freedom" -- for the few, the employers, to exploit. For the rest of us, there are few freedoms, and fewer all the time. The "Patriot Act" and "War on Terrorism" are nothing else but smokescreens behind which yet more of our rights are being taken away.

    We need to support the NYU strikers, and of course support Prof. Nelson -- good for him! But the problem is much deeper. We need a bit of "freedom" and "democracy" for employees, workers, students, the majority. And we don't have them now.

  • AAUP Follies
  • Posted by Chuck on April 28, 2006 at 10:35am EDT
  • Nelson and Buck confirm anew how badly academics like them remained marooned in the 70s.

    Their pious, self-righteous posturing and faux claims about solidarity validated my decision to allow my membership in the AAUP to lapse ten years ago.

    With clowns like them at the helm, I expect to save my money for at least another ten years

  • Posted by Tom on April 28, 2006 at 11:35am EDT
  • You know Chuck, if you think getting arrested represents "pious, self-righteous posturing and faux claims about solidarity," I question your ability to discern what constitutes a genuine act and a real claim. The fact of the matter is that Cary could just as easily kept himself safe and comfortable at home, issuing proclamations from an armchair. And he didn't. He campaigned for the presidency of AAUP on a platform that understood the dire situation of not only AAUP but higher education as well. And he promised action. And he has delivered in a most bold manner. Frankly, the only person stuck in the past here is you.

    Congratulations to Cary. Here's hoping that his example inspires many, many more such acts of resistance to NYU and to those denying the dignity and right of graduate (and faculty) labor as they work to turn higher education into just another business.

  • We're awful? Then get out
  • Posted by A.D. on April 28, 2006 at 11:45am EDT
  • " .. the problem is much deeper. We need a bit of “freedom” and “democracy” for employees, workers, students, the majority .."

    A nation that tolerates an apologist for Stalin is far greater than the apologist. Who happens to have a comfy $750,000 TIAA/CREF retirement fund filled with common stock from Exxon/Mobil, Waste Management, IBM, General Motors, et al.

    This would be laughable, if it wasn't so ridiculous and inane. Uncle Joe knew what to do with whiny malcontents -- Camp Siberia.

  • Posted by Erik on April 28, 2006 at 11:45am EDT
  • Graduate students, as well as adjunct workers, are systematically exploited far and wide at universities around the country. Objections to collective bargaining generally see the university as an all-powerful employer ensuring the best interests of undergraduates, and grad employees -- who teach a majority of classes at some institutions -- as greedy and selfish for wanting to unionize. As long as we see higher ed as a factory for spitting out new workers, we will continue to see employees exploited, the quality of education decline, and universities subject to the global market, which will include fewer positions for full professors, more part-timers, and, ultimately, outsourcing via company-funded education and internet-based degrees.

  • Intellectual honesty and courage
  • Posted by Doug , Faculty on April 28, 2006 at 12:00pm EDT
  • It is sad to see members of the professorate so intellectually disabled that they are unable (or unwilling) to stand up for the democratic rights of these employees.

    Graduate employee unions have existed for over thirty years in the United States - the first one was formed in 1969 at the University of Michigan. They are the norm in Canada.

    It is a plain fact that some graduate students work some times for universities. And it is a simple truth that this is a quid pro quo arrangement that mirrors traditional
    employment. Ergo, they should have rights at work.

    Every honest person knows this. (Even the IRS recognizes this fact and taxes graduate assistants as such.) And most labor boards also recognize this as well. There are two great exceptions: the Bush administration's anti-labor board and a few driveling pusillanimous faculty who are gunning for administrative jobs. Such people suggest that one can't be a student and a worker, but only one or the other in a wholly transparent attempt to keep graduate assistants subservient and docile. This is as self-serving as Wal-Mart saying it has no 'employees,' only 'associates.' Or Whole Foods running anti-union campaigns saying that has no 'employees,' only 'team members.' If you will not see the fundamentally similarity in these tactics, then you should get back to grad school instead of insulting the intelligence and integrity of the graduate assistants that are fighting for their rights.

    Bravo, Nelson and Buck! Bravo for doing what the AAUP should be doing - fighting for the truth, fighting for the rights and freedoms of academic teachers.

  • Absolutely Unreal
  • Posted by Nate , Teaching Fellow at Lehigh University on April 28, 2006 at 12:20pm EDT
  • I don't think I've ever been as disappointed in the professoriate as I am after reading the responses in this thread.

    Most of them (that is, excepting Grover) are the same old astroturfers, of course -- the folks who'd rather take the coward's path of standing behind their freedoms, rather than the academic's path of defending those freedoms where they're attacked.

    The NYU graduate students are, of course, students. But they're also employees. They get paid to teach classes, just like the rest of us, and their teaching isn't a degree requirement. They're not teaching as apprentices, or to get required experience. They're teaching courses to pay their tuition. That they work for the same institution they go to school at doesn't make them any different from a Chevy-driving GM employee.

    While I expected this kind of "apprentice teaching either-a-student-or-an-employee" kabuki dance from Bush's castrated NLRB (and half-expected it from NYU), I didn't expect that any real professor wouldn't see in this strike the long-term implications for administration/faculty labor relations.

    Once graduate student and adjunct faculty wages get depressed through legal technicalities and Pinkerton-style union busting, do you really think that faculty salaries won't join the race to the bottom? How secure is your department (or even your tenure) when the laws that enforce your contract get changed out from under you?

    If you don't see why this strike is an AAUP issue -- or if you don't bother to look at the NYC UAW, whose membership mainly consists of accountants and middle managers -- you're being intellectually dishonest at best. If an administration can use government to pull the legal rights of one group of academic workers out from under them, they can do the same thing to you.

  • Proud to be an AAUP member
  • Posted by Scott Bruton , Graduate Student Employee at Rutgers University on April 28, 2006 at 12:20pm EDT
  • I have never been more proud to be an AAUP member than I was yesterday at the NYU rally. Seeing Jane Buck and Cary Nelson walk into the street and sit down with fifty-five graduate student employees was inspiring and should send a clear signal to graduate students across the country that the AAUP considers their issues an essential part of the organization's mission. If we are to take back control of academia and our labor from administrators, the AAUP must be at the forefront of such movements by tenure track, nontenure track, adjunct, and grad. labor.

    To those who bemoan a more activist stance by the AAUP leadership, are you happy with the waning of faculty governance over the past three decades, are you happy with the increasing casualization of labor in colleges and universities, are you happy with the continuing decline of tenure track faculty jobs? If you are, then I understand your complaint. If not, then you have the choice either to be part of the problem of academic apathy or part of the solution and join Profs. Buck and Nelson and the NYU grad employees on the front lines of the struggle for control of academia.

  • Posted by Michael Bérubé on April 28, 2006 at 12:20pm EDT
  • I wouldn't worry too much about Zeke's calls for "dialogue," Leo. In one of his earlier comments, he complained that the AAUP does not have a sufficiently "balanced" view of tenure and academic freedom. You know, because it always, boringly and predictably, defends these things. But as David Horowitz says, you can't get a good education if they're telling you only half the story. One side wants to preserve academic freedom and tenure; the other side wants to destroy them. Surely the truth, as ever, lies somewhere in the middle, and I look forward to having a reasonable and balanced dialogue about this.

  • So Furr, So Good
  • Posted by chicken little on April 28, 2006 at 1:45pm EDT
  • Professor Furr, I am shocked, shocked that you fail to include the Democratic Party in your imperialist conspiracy. Before we know it, you may be retreating from your praise of Stalin, champion of democracy.

  • Civil disobediance?
  • Posted by Joe on April 28, 2006 at 2:10pm EDT
  • Civil disobediance makes sense when you are trying to chagne the government. NYU is a private university, however. How exactly does civil disobediance (blocking streets) affect NYU?

    If NYU is like other universities, students can be dismissed for criminal convictions while in school. It would be ironic if the strikes took actions that gave NYU the legal ability to kick them out of school entirely.

  • Point of order: any idea what this might cost?
  • Posted by R.A.S. on April 28, 2006 at 2:10pm EDT
  • All these brave words about quality, academic freedom, the working-class, etc. Absent Ashley Olsen and similar students, let me ask this, on behalf of NYU students, of Dr. Nelson --

    Has the local AAUP chapter made any projections about what impact their contract proposals would have on student tuition? That is, as opposed to management's?

    Saying "that's not our job, that's management's" is not enough. "High quality" that is unaffordable is no quality at all.

    Even "back of the envelope" calculations would show students what they might be facing, under either plan. That is, students might support AAUP, if the numbers fall into place.

    Why provide that info to students? Yo -- they (and their families) pay the bills, dude. Not the administrators.

  • Spend another 38 Cents, Berube
  • Posted by Reader on April 28, 2006 at 2:15pm EDT
  • Well, I'm so glad to see Michael Berube involved in this dispute again. Last time, he wrote his heart out in his "fair and balanced" way on his blog, after shafting the grad students at the MLA due to "procedural technicalities."

    Spend another 38 cents (I know that will take a big dent out of your salary) and send PResident Sexton a letter stating your concerns. Just don't use your typical flaming technique that you hurl at people who don't share your point of view: ala "D'HO."

  • Fair and Balanced
  • Posted by Follower of Berube's Blog on April 28, 2006 at 2:50pm EDT
  • "Surely the truth, as ever, lies somewhere in the middle, and I look forward to having a reasonable and balanced dialogue about this."

    Oh, and I'm sure you're precisely the one to offer that sort of "fair and balanced," middle-of-the-road, pseudo-leftist dialogue on your blog. Can't wait to see your latest antics: who will you encourage your insipid readers to bait and harrass this time?

    Wasn't the "D'ho" fiasco good enough for you as far as revealing the sorts of dirty name-calling tactics to which you stoop?

    Please AAUP, go back to drafting legislation regarding Somalia; make the sorts of "real world" changes that you're so good at, and stay the heck off our campus.

  • I'll be Joining Up
  • Posted by Joseph Duemer , Professor at Clarkson University on April 28, 2006 at 3:15pm EDT
  • I had let my AAUP membership lapse some years ago, but now that Professor Nelson (who clearly understands the issues involved in academic emb=ployment & compensation) is at the helm, I'll be sending in my check. And that's at the full professor level.

    Last year was the second year in a row that academic pay lagged behind inflation. We stand together or we fail in isolation.

  • Posted by Fred/Wilma on April 28, 2006 at 10:45pm EDT
  • I just want to say that I, too, have been stalking Michael Berube's blog ever since he mentioned the NYU strike, and I, too, am off my meds.

    And I am deeply offended by D.Ho.

  • Posted by Vika Zafrin at Brown University on April 29, 2006 at 6:50am EDT
  • Many commercial ventures, especially of the kind involved in "knowledge work" (software development, venture capital, many others), pay people to work for them based on the skillset those people possess. Many of these same companies pay for their employees' continued education, even though their main purpose is to make money by creating products and services.

    Universities are purportedly hallowed halls of Learning, the single most precious possession humans have. Without learning, no wheel.

    Universities contract with students to teach them when they admit said students.

    Universities also, as pointed out in the article (or was it one of the comments?), don't put just anyone in front of a classroom. They put people in front of the classroom whom they deem to possess the skillset necessary for teaching. (Whether or not a given student actually possesses this skillset, or gets adequate professional support, is a different story.)

    So, if universities recognize that the people teaching their courses possess the knowledge and ability to teach, and pay them for teaching, how is this not employment? And, given that the university's pledge to teach a person has nothing to do with that person's already-existing teaching set (you have to be a good learner to get into graduate school, not a good teacher), where does their student status even come into play?

    NYU lacks common decency and good will. I absolutely support the striking graduate students there, and applaud the faculty who are willing to stick their necks out for the junior colleagues *whom they actually value*. Especially faculty in such visible positions as Cary Nelson.

  • Offended!
  • Posted by Barney Rubble on April 29, 2006 at 10:20am EDT
  • I, too, have been following Mr. Berube's thoughts on the NYU Strike, and what I notice is the hypocrisy he demonstrates. At least Cary Nelson and Jane Buck had the nerve to be arrested. All Mr. Berube had the courage to do was write a 9000 article stroking his own ego after his badly mishandled efforts at the MLA.

    I disagree with Nelson that we should all boycott a school that refuses to recognize a union. However, I don't think it is any more "moral" to do as Berube does, and use the strike as an opportunity to demonstrate(desperately as he does) to NYU's left-leaning faculty that he, too, could be a Marxist star.

    His so-called Marxist sympathies with the workers are shallow. One only has to follow his self-glorifying name-dropping to see that his vision of socialism extends to the bathroom mirror.

  • Meds
  • Posted by Michael Bérubé on April 29, 2006 at 10:20am EDT
  • As the parent of a child with disabilities, I take offense to Fred/Wilma's crack about being off his/her medication.

    As many of you stalking me already know, you can read about Jamie on my blog. I try to balance my political pieces on NYU with poignant family anecdotes. "Fair and balanced," I always say.

    And I, too, am offended by D'ho.

  • Posted by g. meyerson on April 29, 2006 at 10:20am EDT
  • I’ve read the comments to the article carefully and the anti union position argues that Professors Nelson and Buck and the strikers are clownish, faux, inane, foolish, immature and sad—creatures of the 1970s (ouch). While calling for nuance and balance, the anti unionists respond to pro union commentary with name calling and no evidence (name calling attached to good argument is okay). One post seems to suggest that allowing unionization of grad students would make NYU unaffordable for ordinary people. This, along with the comment that many of the Teaching Assistants had gone back to work (why?), was by far the most intelligent thing said by the antiunionists.

    The pronunion side argues that collective bargaining is supposed to be a right, that graduate student unionizing is part of a larger struggle againt corporatization, outsourcing, the spread of low paid and insecure academic labor. Their analysis of opponents rhetoric links the claim that grad student teachers aren’t workers to calling Walmart employees “associates.”

    Even though the anti unionists in effect say absolutely nothing of substance, I would be sympathetic if the U.S. actually resembled the stories we’re told in civics class about the American Dream, upward mobility, the expanding middle class, equal opportunity and all that.

    On Oprah the other day, they actually had a show on the taboo subject of class. And the usual stats were trotted out about the top one percent owning more wealth than the bottom 90 percent--the lack of health care for millions, you know the routine. The prounion people think this is a bad thing and that the mechanisms behind the continuing transfer of wealth and power to the elite are connected to what is going on in this strike.

    I support the strikers, and Professors Nelson and Buck because they are right. It’s not a close call. The antiunionists are foolish, probably quite mature, perhaps even happy—creatures of the 1890s.

    meyerson.

  • Staying on Topic
  • Posted by Amused on April 29, 2006 at 12:40pm EDT
  • As always, I am delighted to see the intellectuals of the world staying on topic and discussing the things that really matter: their blogs, their disgruntled views of David Horowitz, their career-climbing aspirations, and their meds.

    Workers of the world unite! Roger Touissant is locked up in a jail cell (rightly so), and I think some of you should join him. You're obviously as delusional as he is.

  • Posted by Fred/Wilma/Barney on April 29, 2006 at 12:40pm EDT
  • I don't think that's Michael Bérubé who posted that last comment under the name "Michael Bérubé." I think it's me. Though I can't be sure anymore.

  • Posted by eugene holland on April 29, 2006 at 3:55pm EDT
  • R.A.S. raises a good point about the affordability (or lack thereof, rather) of higher education in this country. But especially at a private institution like NYU, mercilessly exploiting some of some of its younger teachers is not an acceptable way of making a prestigious education more affordable. Universities must pay their teachers decent wages, period; society must find other ways to assure access to higher education for those unable to pay.

  • Posted by Marc on April 29, 2006 at 5:00pm EDT
  • "Society must find other ways to assure access to higher education for those unable to pay."

    Try telling that to the Bush administration. You people act as if NYU exists within a vacuum, able to pay the costs of all those who deserve an education. Higher education is not a charity; why not protest the White House and its consistent cuts to higher ed?

    Go get arrested for that cause; it is far more noble than impeding upon the rights of undergraduates and many others who use NYU's facilities. I hope those who were arrested have the nerve to do it again: build up those ever-so-attractive criminal records till they go from violations for DisCon to some real time..

  • One small idea
  • Posted by R.A.S. on April 29, 2006 at 6:50pm EDT
  • “Society must find other ways to assure access to higher education for those unable to pay.”

    One idea that's been bandied about, to control costs: use seniors to teach freshmen.

    Not a perfect solution -- there never is. But given how much public funds are being consumed by entitlements -- at current rate, medical costs could consume public education's budget within 20 years -- trying something is better than wringing one's hands or yelling "gimme."

  • AAUP did a great thing!
  • Posted by Julia on April 29, 2006 at 6:50pm EDT
  • I'm so inspired by what AAUP people by getting arrested at NYU that I'll sign up for the first time. I think that's terrific that their leaders did! Congratulatons.

  • mercilessly exploiting?
  • Posted by Brian on April 30, 2006 at 1:40pm EDT
  • For four years I was a low-paid graduate teaching assistant. However, the university did allow me to earn a ph.d. while paying very little tuition. Not once did I ever think that the students of the University were obligated to pay me more than the amount to which I had agreed.

    No one forced me to attend the university. No one forced me to accept the graudate assistantship that was offered. To the contrary, I am grateful for the opportunties that the citizens of the great state of NC provided me (I attended a public institution).

    If the NYU grad students believed that they are underpaid then they should decline their assistantships and seek other employers who will pay them more.

    If enough students decline their assistantships then NYU would be forced to raise grad asst pay.

  • not simple
  • Posted by moving toward retirement on April 30, 2006 at 1:40pm EDT
  • The NYU situation is not simple. It is a strike that reminds us that an increasing number of those who teach receive pay, benefits, and privileges greater inferior to those of full-time, tenured and tenure-track faculty (and, more generally, reminds us--big surprise--that this is a country with enormous inequalities). It is a strike that reminds us that today few unions can get what they want by withholding their labor--they need popular and political support. It is a strike in which critics of the NYU leadership expect higher education to be warn-hearted islands of anti-capitalism. From a distance, it appears like a strike with gloves on. For instance, faculty sympathizers sometimes hold classes off campus, a symbol that inconveniences students but doesn't inflict much pain on the NYU administration. The new AAUP chief proposes a boycott which could mean that striking NYU graduate students will be refused job interviews! All in all, a sad situation that an inflatable "rat" won't solve. Although I am sympathetic toward the strikers, I expect the strike to fizzle out, if it hasn't done so already. The general public doesn't compare the "voluntary" poverty of TA's with that of ill-educated janitors, kitchen workers, and the like. The question that is too big to answer in the context of a single strike is how should different kinds of work be valued in a capitalist system. I doubt that it is good enough to say that virtually everybody should get a lot more.

  • Posted by Jeffrey on May 3, 2006 at 2:05pm EDT
  • Despite the name calling, frothing, and generalized whining of so many who are trying their very best to belittle the striking graduate assistants and their supporters, there is but one very simple issue at stake here:

    Graduate assistants are workers who should be allowed to collectively bargain if they wish to do so.

    That's it. NYU and the current members of the NLRB are ignoring the clear wishes of the graduate assistants.

    If you personally would not want to be a member of a union, then vote against it if the issue ever comes up in your own place of employment. However, your opinion about the soundness of the decision by graduate assistants at NYU to unionize is completely irrelevant to the bedrock principle that is being undermined by the Administration and the current NLRB. The right to collective bargain is under attack. Defend it or lose it.

    As for the "But think of the cost to undergraduates!" red herring, for the 2003–04 fiscal year John Sexton earned $897,139 in compensation and benefits, a 16 percent increase from the year before. That was the 6th highest of any university president in the country. If he had similar pay increases in 2004 and 2005, he's now making over $1 million per year.

    Shockingly, I have not read any statements by Mr. Sexton voluteering to accept a pay cut to make tuition more affordable.

  • Opinion v. Law
  • Posted by JBM on May 3, 2006 at 5:35pm EDT
  • "Graduate assistants are workers who should be allowed to collectively bargain if they wish to do so.

    That’s it. NYU and the current members of the NLRB are ignoring the clear wishes of the graduate assistants."

    Your personal opinion (along with that of the students) is in conflict with the law. It is important to understand the difference separating them. It is also important to understand the difference between an employee and a student in a teacher training program in school. Failure to do so leads to nothing but emotional upset born of confusion.

  • the difference that is not a difference?
  • Posted by Salvador Dalai Llama on May 4, 2006 at 5:20am EDT
  • You know, back when I was a grad student, it sure felt like I was an employee. I signed this "contract" thing, for instance, and the payroll office, of all places, kept sending me a monthly check. I sometimes wonder if it had anything to do with all that teaching I was doing at the time. Hm. Go figure.

    Snark aside, are we honestly still debating whether grad students are workers?

    The issue I'm curious about is the claim that the union's demands somehow infringed on the faculty's rights to control the educational environment. Does anyone have a link that explains that claim?

  • Salvador
  • Posted by JBM on May 4, 2006 at 7:00am EDT
  • It was financial aid that you received, not a salary. You wouldn't have received anything had you not been an enrolled student. People need to stop causing problems for grad students who do not understand apprentice teacher status while they are studying. The confusion is apt to cost them a hell of a lot.

  • "Emotional upset born of confusion"?
  • Posted by Jeffrey on May 8, 2006 at 1:20pm EDT
  • Of course the most recent NLRB ruling by the Bush appointed board has declared that graduate assistants who work for universities are only "students."

    If you truly, honestly, somehow believe that graduate assistants who teach classes, grade papers, and do research in exchange for financial compensation are not workers, then you should oppose this strike.

    If you believe that these adults who earn bi-weekly paychecks in exchange for their labor are indeed workers, then you should stand up and defend the basic right to collective bargaining which is under assault.

    The most recent NLRB decision is wrong on the facts and wrong on the law, but three GOP appointees got to write the majority decision. There will be a new board appointed in two years. A new challenge will be heard. In the meantime, NYU can choose to bargain with GSOC if they wish to do so. The ongoing strike and the efforts of groups like the AAUP continue to make NYU's refusal to bargain a costly choice, both financially and in terms of their international reputation.

    Dred Scott was the law of the land once. Those who were in favor of the law at that time suffered a bit of emotional upset born of confusion down the road, as I recall.

  • No Comparison
  • Posted by JBM on May 8, 2006 at 5:30pm EDT
  • A student voluntarily undertaking a teaching apprenticeship in school has nothing in common with slavery under _Dred Scott._