News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
May 11, 2006
Is a one-size-fits-all union best for everyone at the bargaining table? Adjuncts and full-time faculty members at two community colleges in southern California — Grossmont and Cuyamaca Colleges, near San Diego — are currently in battle mode over the question, and their contentions are highlighting an issue that is becoming of increasing concern to professors.
“Objectively, any kinks in unity between adjuncts and full-timers in the same union are a perfect setup for administrators to be able to divide and conquer,” says Zoe Close, a full-time faculty member and chair of the humanities and religious studies departments at Grossmont. “The situation with part-timers amounts to exploitive labor. No full-time faculty member I know likes this situation.”
Close is president of the independent United Faculty union, which includes about 300 full-timers and between about 900 part-timers at Grossmont and Cuyamaca Colleges.
“They certainly talk the talk,” says David Milroy, an adjunct French instructor at Grossmont. “The full-time faculty, however, never seem to vote in people who actually help us.” He argues that part-timers aren’t well-represented in the union’s leadership roles. Only 2 of the more than 20 seats on the union’s steering committee are reserved for part-timers. Close says that there are eight additional at-large seats, which could be filled by adjuncts, but that voting by part-timers has traditionally been low in elections.
Milroy has been rallying part-timers in the college district, and they could soon be granted the ability to vote to form a separate bargaining unit. He says that more than 600 adjuncts have now signed a petition in favor of doing so, which would be enough support to hold an election under state labor rules. The unit would be represented by the California Teachers Association, which has been supportive of the part-timers’ efforts thus far.
Milroy says that while he and Close used to be friends — in fact, she is a former student of his — he doesn’t think they are anymore.
As part-timers have become an increasing presence at colleges and universities nationwide, Close and Milroy are not the only ones who don’t see eye to eye. Many adjuncts say that their interests can’t be met by mixed unions because part-time issues tend to sit on the back burner, while full-timers make substantial progress. But some full-timers respond that they’re able to form a more effective overall bargaining unit for negotiations with administrators when the two groups work together, and that part-timers often don’t have the time, power or resources to wage negotiations that frequently take years.
In recent months, there have been notable wins by part-time unions, which have buoyed the hopes of part-timers nationwide. Last October, adjunct members of the United Auto Workers union at the New School, in New York, negotiated a breakthrough contract, which some have called a model for adjunct job security. In November, the Adjunct Faculty Association at Nassau Community College, on Long Island, a deeply rooted independent, hammered out an agreement that substantially increased wages and benefits, and in January, adjuncts at Suffolk University, in Massachusetts, voted in favor of creating their own union, which is associated with the American Association of University Professors.
Robert Gaudino, vice president of the Nassau union, says that he hasn’t seen many instances in his decades of union membership “where adjuncts being part of the full-time union get anything like a fair shake.” “It’s painfully evident that wherever a full-time union represents part-timers as well, they get left behind and left out,” he says.
Gaudino says that throughout the 1970s and early ’80s, full-timers at his institution treated part-timers as if they were “slaves to do the grunt work.” Ultimately, adjuncts there revolted, struggled through two strikes, and formed an independent union of their own – all of which culminated in their recent bargaining successes with administrators.
Full-timers at Nassau, represented by an American Federation of Teachers union, are considered to be well paid and have been largely successful at negotiating attractive contracts. Leaders with the union say that the independent part-time arrangement has ultimately been a positive development, and that many of the tensions Gaudino points out are historical in nature.
“There’s no reason our model couldn’t be effective nationwide,” says Gaudino. “The large numbers of part-timers everywhere make it possible. We have the power.” He also says that adjuncts should not be fearful that they’ll “end up homeless” if they choose to strike, saying that many are accustomed to working several jobs to make ends meet, and that striking at one institution doesn’t mean they can’t work at another in the interim.
“Part-timers need solid leadership that is not afraid,” he says. “Our two strikes weren’t fun or pretty, but adjuncts have to understand that they have great strength.”
Not all adjuncts believe that Gaudino’s action plan is necessary. Andrew Purvis, an adjunct English instructor at Cerritos College, in California, says that he’s found it beneficial to be part of a combined union, in his case one that’s affiliated with the American Federation of Teachers. “Part-timers often don’t have the time or power necessary to bargain with the district,” he says. “I think we have greater strength in our numbers.”
Purvis believes that different legal environments in different states may make it more advantageous for part-timers in different regions to become independent. “I’m glad that part-time unions can succeed,” he says. “I wonder, though, if this is more illustrative of the abilities of specific negotiators or specific unions in specific states.”
Larry Gold, who directs the higher education department at the AFT, says that as a general rule, organizers there believe that faculty interests are best advanced when full-timers and part-timers are represented by the same local.
“But that’s not the end of the story,” says Gold. “For locals representing both full-time and part-time faculty, we also believe that adjunct faculty should have full voting rights, that they should be actively encouraged to participate in all union affairs and that the union should push for full implementation of part-time faculty rights.” The organization offers a “Standards of Good Practice” document on the subject.
Gold also sees the rationale behind Gaudino’s arguments. “Although we think that bargaining together is preferable, sometimes the full-time faculty or the part-time faculty at a college just can’t agree on a common program and feel they can not pursue their aims together,” he notes. “In those cases, or when the impetus for bargaining comes from just one side, the faculty are likely to form separate locals, many of which are successful.”
Even in these cases, though, Gold says that the union urges full-time and part-time faculty unions to work together as closely as they can to prevent them from being in a divide-and-conquer situation vis-a-vis administrators.
Milroy, who is leading the part-time union breakaway effort at Grossmont and Cuyamaca Colleges, says that the ideal would be a “wall-to-wall” union where part-timers and full-timers have a unified voice to achieve positive results for all.
“Full-time faculty are intricately entwined with the campus,” he says. “Yes, they might be able to do some things we can’t. But if they aren’t representing us well, all that doesn’t amount to anything.”
The state labor relations board in California is expected to decide soon on whether the part-timers at Grossmont and Cuyamaca can proceed with their plans to secede.
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Without immigrants the American Economic platform would be different. Without adjuncts the full time tenured faculty in an institution will not be able to do what they do best — teach at will, maintain academic freedom (as defined by themselves), schedule classes that are extremely convenient for themselves (to name a few advantages) and focus less on students and their needs. The part timers on the other hand are under paid, get to teach classes that the tenured faculty don’t want to teach, have no benefits, no job security etc. etc. etc. Many colleges especially community colleges are able to boast about their excellence because the part timers who have real world experiences are more than willing to do anything to satisfy the students, the department as well as the full time faculty who control their assignemnts of classes. I am glad that the esteemed part time faculty members in some institutions are voicing their concerns and making their demands public. I am only hoping that it catches up everywhere.
Changeagent, at 9:15 am EDT on May 11, 2006
300 full-timers to 900 part- timers? THREE-QUARTERS of the sections at these colleges are taught by part-timers? Well, doesn’t that just say it all. What I would like to know is just how it came to be that, across this entire country, tens of thousands of highly educated, highly motivated, and highly talented human beings have agreed like sheep to check their self-respect at the door and participate, sometimes for years on end, in this disgusting, immoral travesty. Unions indeed. A day without immigrants? How about a lifetime without adjuncts? And for anyone’s information, the only reason the powers that be allow this situation to continue is the same reason batterers beat their wives — because they can. Both are deliberately abusive and exploitive, and both are genuinely sorry for the black eye and perforated kidney in the morning. Only sometimes wives actually leave.
marya, at 8:40 pm EDT on May 11, 2006
Oh, I’m terribly sorry — bad math. Assuming the 300 full-timers teach 4 courses and the 900 adjuncts teach 2, that means the part-time faculty teach 150% of the courses, not 75%.
marya, at 8:40 pm EDT on May 11, 2006
Late in the day, screwy math. 150% of the courses taught by fulltimers, but “only” 60% of total. (Right?) Too angry to do math tonight.
marya, at 4:40 am EDT on May 12, 2006
In light of Marya’s comments, I would like to explain a couple of details about California law as it applies to adjunct in the state’s community college system.
First, no adjunct is to receive an assignment in excess of 60% of a full-time load. Depending on the school, a full-time load is either 12 or 15 units. While a school can assign units over that line, it is then obliged to provide full-time pay and benefits diring that period. This does not apply during summer, when loads are unrestricted.
Second, state law now limits each community college to a 40% coverage limit by adjuncts. In other words, schools are supposed to have no more than 40% of their units taught by adjuncts. Those schools that have not yet come into compliance with this limit must show “progress” (that is a rather ambiguous term in this context) toward reaching that goal.
The key here is that while each adjunct may legaly receive an assignment for up to 60%, in practice, the average is probably closer to 25% or 30%. Furthermore, a union that represents 900 adjuncts may only be representing, say, 800 who are active in a given term, quite a number of whom are teaching only one 3-unit course. Other considerations may further limit others. An adjunct given a 3-unit course and a 4-unit course will be capped at 7 units (provided we are talking about a school where 15 units is a full-time load) if the department offers no 2-unit courses, and this further lowers the average, number oof units being taught by adjuncts.
Finally, many adjuncts have other jobs, even other primary careers, so they prefer to teach, for instance, one evening course for three hours once per week after they leave the office. For those, as well as for the many who are building their teaching experience with the goal of applying for full-time tenure-track positions, this is anything but saying they have “agreed like sheep to check their self-respect at the door and participate [...] in this disgusting, immoral travesty.” Indeed, those who are unwilling to put the time in as adjuncts often move on to other careers, probably realizing that they do not feel the call as strongly as those who tough it out for a few years.
Andrew Purvis, at 4:40 am EDT on May 12, 2006
I am a president of a large combined local. We struggle internally between various groups represented by our 1260 member local—only 240 or so are full time.
Our recent contracts have brought major gains for all the faculty represted because at the table we speek for all members. One member one vote keeps us honest. Maybe the locals should check their bylaws and constitutions. Deviding faculty will not help.
sally pierce, President LCCMAHE at Lansing Community College, at 11:45 am EDT on May 12, 2006
Ah, must have touched a nerve. Every single old chestnut rationalization trotted out, yet again. Most adjuncts have careers elsewhere and “prefer” to teach one or two sections. Many adjuncts are gaining teaching experience to make them more desirable candidates for all those full-time positions. Then, when they realize their call isn’t as “strong” as it used to be, they move on. Please. (And yes, Andrew, people are familiar with labor law and how it affects part-time work in all careers, but thanks for the refresher.) My remarks stand. It’s a degrading, immoral system, a shameful exemplar of the two-tier systems that exist in both academe and the corporation throughout the country. The fact that it is not limited to academe does not make it right or justifiable; neither do shady statistics that show that really, lots of people teach only so-and-so many units, so it’s really not so bad. National averages continue to show that 40-60% of all sections are taught by part-timers for extremely low salaries. All the justifications and rationalizations in the world will not turn injustice into justice.
marya, at 11:45 am EDT on May 13, 2006
Mrya is right. The exploitation of part-timers is shameful. Rationalizations claiming that part-timers have real jobs and real careers elsewhere ignore the fact that most part-timers are freeway flyers who work MORE than full-time.
I was a part-time freeway flier for fifteen years before I got a full-time teaching job. I learned to live on peanuts, and because I was blessed with good health, I got along without any medical insurance. But what bothered me most was the fact that I was invisible. When I began teaching in 1973,I was one of only two part-timers in the community college English department where I work. When I got a contract, there were at least 60 part-time teachers in my department. No one—and certainly not the union that was supposed to represent me—seemed to notice.
This article, and the thread of comments that follow it, is a good example of what I mean. Relatively minor flaps, like David Horowitz’s inane whining, generate dozens of responses, while an article dealing with the fact that tens of thousands of our colleagues work without a living wage, minimal health benefits, or even a hint of job security produce only a few comments.
The uncomfortable truth that no one wants to acknowledge is that because school budgets are finite, dividing them up is a zero-sum game. If one faculty group gets more, another gets less. Wall-to-wall locals are good for part-timers if their interests are represented. If not, then part-time faculty need to organize and bargain for themselves.
Philip, at 2:00 pm EDT on May 13, 2006
I firmly believe that in combined unions the adjuncts will always be provided the short end of the stick. If, in a combined union, adjuncts had equal voting rights to elect union leadership and equal power in setteing the agenda then things would be different. Ask a full timer if they are willing to provide adjuncts with equality. Don’t hold your breath waiting for “yes".
Bob Gaudino, VP Adjunct Faculty Assn at nassau Community College, at 7:50 pm EDT on May 14, 2006
One member, one vote. I would say it is a dream, but I am living it in a union that, from its inception only a couple years ago, was designed for equal participation and across-the-board representation.
What worries me is the culture that exists on the campuses at which this kind of agreement can’t be reached. Perhaps there is a similar dynamic (at some schools, anyway) between full-time and part-time as there is (again, at some schools) between four-year and two-year schools (see this recent IHE piece).
Andrew Purvis, at 4:50 pm EDT on May 15, 2006
The wall-to-wall union in the community college where I work allows all union members to vote. Even so, part-timers haven’t been joining.
We just voted to impose agency shop fees on all faculty members (and I’ll spare you the argle-bargle that went on). Now everyone who doesn’t opt out of union membership (but will still pay their fair share of the costs of representation) will be able to vote.
We’ll see what happens, won’t we?
Philip, at 4:35 pm EDT on May 17, 2006
Andrew, I’m glad that union is working out !!! I think it is the way to go, for the reasons you suggest — when possible.
Everyone — it’s true, the adjunct category _was_ invented so that people with other careers could drop in and teach a course of interest to them, bringing to it their academic training and also the perspective from their non-academic careers in journalism, business, whatever.
Universities have then perverted this, and are using adjuncts as these sort of permanent, overworked TAs. It isn’t really the fault of the professors or the departments, or even the deans: much as we may write memos, vote, have formal meetings, talk, etc., it is really difficult to get a ‘bottom line’ and ‘flexibility’ oriented administrator to convert an adjunct line into a regular one.
It is to everyone’s benefit to have stable, full time faculty: this permits creative growth, whereas the practice of using so many people as part timers leads, except when part time work really is what the person wants, to stagnation and fragmentation, for the part timer but also for the institution that underemploys them.
Professor Zero, at 12:35 pm EDT on May 22, 2006
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Requisition Number: 2890 Number of Positions: 1 Full or Part-Time: Full-time Wage: $55,000-$72,000 Duties & Responsibilities: ... see job
Today, NLU serves more than 12,000 students from five Chicago area campuses, in addition to campuses in three states and ... see job
East Carolina University, a constituent institution of the University of North Carolina, is a doctoral institution with an ... see job
BSC is one of the largest and most exciting centers for higher education in the commonwealth. Here in our idyllic setting, ... see job
South Texas College Job Announcement # 2010 – 3031 Position pending Board approval of FY10 Budget Please note that only ... see job
HCC is seeking to create a pool for positions in digital media. There is an opening in the Spring Semester for a Monday class ... see job
The college is seeking applicants for a full-time, tenure track faculty position in Culinary Arts beginning fall semester of ... see job
CCNY is a campus of the City University of New York (CUNY). It is CUNY’s Flagship Campus for Science and Engineering, and ... see job
The Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Rochester invites applications for a tenure-track faculty ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Look Across to the UK
The author writes: “Only 2 of the more than 20 seats on the union’s steering committee are reserved for part-timers. Close says that there are eight additional at-large seats, which could be filled by adjuncts, but that voting by part-timers has traditionally been low in elections.”
We just published a piece about 7,800 part-time faculty at the Open University in the UK who, when the full-time faculty union representatives agreed to a salary schedule that was not in the best interest of the part-timers, rose up en masse. The associate lecturers (as part-timers are referred to there) now occupy a large number of the seats on the local’s Executive Board.
Could something similar even be done at SIEU, UAW, AFT, NEA and AAUP locals in which full-time and part-time faculty are represented together? Many unified local leaders realize that, if there were proportional representation, full-time faculty would be outvoted at every turn. So, locals do things like “set aside two seats for part-time faculty.” On the surface, this looks like a good idea.
The truth of the matter is that, until, like their colleagues in England, part-time faculty within unified locals rise up and “throw out the bums” who are not representing all of the members with equal zeal, then part-timers will continue to be poorly represented by their own unions.
Associate lecturers in England have also resorted to suing their union locals, as well as the national office, in order to force the leadership to represent part-time faculty interests fairly.
A unified local is, I think, in theory, the best tool in negotiating. If the part-timers at these schools had called me for advice, I would have suggested putting their energies into taking over leadership of the local, and filing a suit against their own union on the basis of the fact that their professional concerns were not being addressed with equal zeal by the organizations that take money to represent them.
It’s time for part-time faculty across the U.S., who are unhappy with the leadership from the national offices and locals of their respective unions, to take aggressive action and demand equitable representation.
P.D. Lesko Executive Editor Adjunct Advocate magazineAnn Arbor, Michigan
P.D. Lesko, Executive Editor at Adjunct Advocate magazine, at 7:55 am EDT on May 11, 2006