Sunday
September 7, 2008
Advertisement
Advertisement
News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
April 24
Liberation (of Adjuncts) Theology
Adjunct faculty members and their advocates put forth lots of arguments for improving the benefits paid to those off the tenure track. But Marquette University’s theology faculty has come up with an unusual argument that involves a power higher than a college president.
Related stories
- Poor, Even by Grad Student Standards, July 7
- Age, Experience and Bias, June 6
- Pushing for Job Conversions, March 6
- Key Legal Win in Adjunct Union Battle, Jan. 28
- New Measures for Gender Inequities, Oct. 26, 2006
After discussion of a memo questioning how Marquette could stay true to moral and Biblical values while not paying for health insurance for part-time instructors, the theology department voted to call on the administration to start paying for health insurance for those who teach at least two courses at a time at the university. While it is unclear whether the theology department can sway administrators, Marquette is a Jesuit university, so the views of its theologians might carry weight — and at the very least can be embarrassing if ignored.
The author of the memo, Daniel C. Maguire, a professor of theology, said he found himself thinking about the treatment of part-time faculty members after discussing with his students the Biblical teachings about the powerful and the powerless.
“I teach ethics, and I was just recently talking about what the Bible says to us about how every society builds up royalty-slave syndromes, and royals let the slaves do their work for them,” he said. It happens in the business world, he said. It happened in ancient societies, he said. “And I told them that it happens here.” He explained: “I have tenure. I have good benefits, and there are people doing as much work as I am. And they don’t have health insurance. They are covering most of our courses so we can have these leisurely 3-2 schedules,” he said.
While Maguire said he’s proud of how he has spent his time out of the classrooms (10 books and dozens of articles, among other activities), he said that there was something wrong — morally — with tenured professors not speaking out about the conditions facing adjuncts who make their research possible by covering so many classes.
He said that a majority of introductory theology courses are taught by adjuncts — typically Ph.D.’s who have been unable to find a tenure track job. They are paid about $3,200 a course, he said, but receive no health insurance. Because they must scramble to find enough courses to teach — at Marquette and elsewhere — they have no job security and thus no academic freedom, Maguire said.
In addition to citing Biblical teaching on obligations to the less fortunate, Maguire cited the practices of well known corporations. “Even corporations like Starbucks (not the expected moral prophets or beacons of justice in our society) provide health care benefits for their full-time as well as their part-time workers,” he wrote in his memo to his colleagues. “Here is the question for this university with its avowed religious commitments: Can we rise to the moral standards of Starbucks? As of now we have adjunct faculty teaching some of the same courses we teach but without the benefits given to Starbucks workers.”
Maguire said he understood that there are some adjuncts at Marquette (as at many colleges) who hold full-time jobs in various professions (typically with benefits) and who teach courses on the side. He said he wasn’t worried about such arrangements, but that these adjuncts shouldn’t hide the reality that many adjuncts are working full-time without any benefits or a decent wage. Maguire noted that the phrase “a living wage” — currently much quoted by student activists working on behalf of custodial staff — has its origins in the work of a Catholic theologian, the Rev. John A. Ryan, who wrote a book by that name in 1906.
“This is a classical term now in Catholic thought,” Maguire said.
Now that the theology faculty has adopted the resolution calling for health insurance for adjuncts, the department chair, the Rev. John Laurance, has written to the other department chairs and to the administration calling for the benefits to be offered.
David Shrock, interim provost at Marquette, said that the university does provide a range of benefits for part timers, including flexible spending accounts, tuition remission, an e-mail account, and a match in TIAA-CREF accounts of up to 8 percent after two consecutive years of work if the employee contributes 5 percent. As to health insurance, Shrock said that the university allowed part timers who are on full-year contracts to “have access” to the university’s plans, provided that the adjuncts pay all of the costs. While the part-time professors thus gain the benefit of the university’s group rate, they would shoulder all expenses and the university would pay nothing.
“Marquette has a proud tradition of attracting outstanding faculty and staff who exemplify a commitment to our mission,” Shrock said. “To that end, the university makes a concerted effort to provide competitive salaries and benefits which are clearly delineated at the time of hire. Competing demands for resources are a constant challenge for any institution, and Marquette carefully weighs such demands as it allocates resources annually.”
While Marquette officials said they had only just received the theologians’ statement, it has been circulating on campus, and has already prompted praise from a columnist in the student newspaper, The Marquette Tribune. At the very least, Maguire said, there is more public acknowledgment of the problems faced by part timers. And he rejected the idea that letting them pay for their own health insurance was a solution — given that their salaries are low to start with.
Eric Lombardi, the student columnist, described a Marquette adjunct who must teach six courses at a time — at colleges around Milwaukee — to meet her expenses. Lombardi wrote that there is money to be found when the university wants to find it, and that there is no excuse not to offer health insurance to adjuncts.
“Essentially the administration thinks it’s more important to pay a coach $1.6 million a year to teach boys how to bounce basketballs than to provide fair benefits to its professors,” Lombardi wrote. “My thoughts are these: The money is there and if we’re going to call ourselves Catholic and we’re going to teach Catholic doctrine, which emphasizes the value of human life, then we better be ready to back up that teaching.”
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
Comments
Another view
As an active supporter of Catholic charities — let me frame this another way —
Except in high-demand areas, teaching should be an avocation. To expect others to financially sacrifice to support another’s lifestyle is unfair.
When a charity opens Day 1 — it does not accept 100,000 clients. It accepts what it can support appropriately.
And as to the basketball coach’s salary: given that sport supports women’s sports and most of the men’s money-losing sports — is the termination of all NCAA sports being proposed? Because that is the logical outcome.
L.L., at 7:35 am EDT on April 24, 2008
health insurance for edjuncts
I have NO health insurance from the college in NYC where I’m an adjunct, plus an irregular schedule which makes it hard to fit other financially necessary work around it. To add insult to injury, adjuncts are in a gray area re collecting unemployment (doesn’t work—I’ve tried twice!!) during those gaps when we are not scheduled to teach. Some type of health insurance would be most welcome. I sometimes think our work status parallels that of a casually employed migrant farm worker.
rosanne soifer, at 8:15 am EDT on April 24, 2008
Big picture
I’ll start by agreeing that the compensation life could be better for adjuncts. One way might be for the guild/"closed shop” of tenure process to be adjusted to give a chance to these highly (and equally —a PhD is a PhD) trained individuals who want to teach a chance. That said, suppose Marquette decided to remove all of the other things—the retirement contribution, email (that’s a benefit?—or is it a tool, like chalk)), etc and then pay partial healthcare. Would that be okay? Also, I wonder if the faculty leaders recognize that the expense for healthcare is the same for a full time or a partime worker. Even with group plans, Marquette is probabaly paying over $8-10k for single person coverage, in addition to whatever partial premiums are paid by an employee. The funding of that increased expense, in today’s student-competitive and tuition-price conscious markets, would likely be accomplished by budget reductions elsewhere in the University. Potenetial sources could be the non-replacement of faculty or adjuncts, or support staff. Yes, it is a good thought to provide everything for everybody, but sometimes a half of loaf for all is better than no loaf at all for some.
Richard, Administrator at an eastern university, at 8:35 am EDT on April 24, 2008
The purpose of a university is to teach students to think for themselves. Being on an official sports team teaches students to follow orders and to conform to the group. Athletic programs are thus directly opposed to the university’s purpose, and all athletic programs should therefore be eliminated. If students want to kick, bounce, or hurl balls at each other, they can form a club. Everyone everywhere ought (at least) to have a living wage.
RJS, at 8:40 am EDT on April 24, 2008
Liberate me
” .. Everyone everywhere ought (at least) to have a living wage.”
Excuse me — if someone wants to teach, but no one wants to hire them — is that my issue?
I don’t think so.
Frank, at 10:10 am EDT on April 24, 2008
For Real?
RJS, you couldn’t possibly have been serious.
“Being on an official sports team teaches students to follow orders and to conform to the group. Athletic programs are thus directly opposed to the university’s purpose.”
Following that line of thinking we should then also discontinue all campus music groups, undergraduate research positions, and the police department to name a few. I’m sorry that you got stuffed in lockers by a couple of inconsiderate football players when you were in high school, but illogical comments like the one above don’t have any place in academic discourse. I’ll be the first to say that intercollegiate athletics brings a whole host of challenges and problems to our campuses; however, I also recognize that when administered appropriately they can be an excellent supplement to the educational missions of universities.
Bryce, at 10:50 am EDT on April 24, 2008
The Morality of the Situation
How lovely that this is being discussed as a moral issue. Adjuncts have been likened to migrant workers often literally waiting on line days before the onset of classes before they find out if they have work or not. Not the best situation to teach in and students suffer from these situations which include lack of access.
Although my situation is better, we all face the worry of non-renewals, at least without a labor agreement with airtight language. In addition we may struggle to be available to students. With five sections right now I am available for 10 hours a week, and by appt. but this is rarely the case for most adjuncts, a luxury really. In addition part-time faculty are often asked to take on extra duties like advising and service on governance committees without additional compensation. Even some receive merit distributions based on unpaid labor that includes research.
My eldest daughter once calculated the number of hours I devoted to extra work resulting in my merit increase that year. Then she let me know how much an hour I made for the extra work, far less than $1.
Whele many say “Don’t we do all this for love of students, and research, and service.” Yes, money isn’t the only motivator, but equity comes down to a moral issue.
So I offer my thanks and prayers that more institutions will recognize this as well.
SU-JJ, Professional Writing Instructor at Syracuse University, at 11:30 am EDT on April 24, 2008
The problem at Marquette is representative of what has happened to traditionally Catholic Universities in the last forty years. Look at the control of the boards of trustees of these institutions. The same people now control these boards as control corporate America. Why should they act any differently? Get rid of unions-get rid of tenure. If you cannot get rid of tenure find a way around it. Hire part-time people who are so in need of employment in their chosen professions that they are completely beholden to the corporation (the board and the University itself) that they must be completely passive.Isn’t efficiency what made America great? The logic is: If the faculty is passive, the University must be better off. This notion that tenured people can speak their minds and be loyal to their disciplines and the faculty as a body is old hat! Certainly as old as certified by the great intellects of the robber barons and Ronald Reagan. America needs efficiency!
John F. Neeson,Ph.D., Prof. of Physics at St. Bonaventure University, at 12:15 pm EDT on April 24, 2008
A question for L.L.:
Can you explain the economic theory behind your statement that “Except in high-demand areas, teaching should be an avocation"?
Universities pay adjuncts low wages because they can—i.e., because they can get relatively high quality for an absolutely absurd price. Presumably, universities benefit as much from the “lifestyle” of dedicated (i.e., non-avocational) adjuncts as the latter themselves suffer for it. If all of the people who work as adjuncts in the hopes of someday making a viable vocation out of it were to give up hope and take “regular” jobs (supposing those are even available), what would happen to the competitive stock of reserve labor on which the universities depend? What about the students whose “lifestyles” predispose them to expect to be taught by people with Ph.D.’s? An institution whose pedagogical work force consisted entirely of “avocational” workers would, it seems to me, have a pretty hard time securing accreditation, much less attracting students.
And here’s a rhetorical question: why do those who love to extoll the virtues of the free market resort so often to the rhetoric of “fairness"? Isn’t the market supposed to have ushered in the reign of a self-sustaining systemic rationality that obviates the need for deontic judgments about “fairness” and “sacrifice” (along with that old-fashioned Aristotelian baggage of distributive justice)?
Benjamin, at 12:15 pm EDT on April 24, 2008
It is interesting that the Theology faculty who signed this letter blame the university for not providing health insurance for the part-time adjuncts who take on the courses that the tenured professors buy out of teaching rather than blame themselves.
If these professors were truly concerned that a just wage (including health benefits) be paid to the adjuncts, they would demand that the university charge their own salaries the appropriate amount to cover the real cost of replacing them in the classroom, or that the professor be expected to find outside grant money to cover it. As it is, a professor can buy out of a 3 course semester teaching load for @ $10,000, about 10-15% of their annual pay, which is coincidentally about the cost of providing annual health insurance and stipend to an adjunct who is teaching a single one of those courses.
The system is obviously out of whack, but for full-time faculty to blame the administration for this when they themselves are the principal beneficiaries of this system is at least as unjust as the problem itself.
Michael, at 3:15 pm EDT on April 24, 2008
I teach adjunct. In the beginning, I did it on the side—I had a day job. Now I am semi-retired, with a pension. But for a young person to make such a choice! Especially a very intelligent young person with a doctorate! I’m puzzled to see such decisions. I read this site and see that adjuncts are typically passed over when tenured positions become available in their own departments. Those bright young people make a fool’s bargain. They make these bargains with the hope of youth, but I wish I could persuade them not to do so. Perhaps I should not even do so myself. I am adding to this situation—people voluntarily selling themselves for such a small price.
MQS, at 7:05 pm EDT on April 24, 2008
Health Insurance for Adjuncts
This article fascinated me as a teaching fellow at Marquette preparing to graduate in May. I will be an adjunct next year earning the salary listed. I also adjunct at two other schools when needed. I’m fortunate enough to have a side job with benefits. But it’s tremendously hard to earn a Ph.D. in this field only to find that there are about 50 candidates for every position (tenure tack or non). I have a second doctorate in addition to this one and have taught at four schools. Yet I can’t even get an interview. Administrators know this. They know we ought to feel privileged to even be working in such a tight market. The problem is not just that the adjuncts receive no benefits, it’s that the government and accrediting agencies have allowed such lax standards that schools are getting rid of as many tenured faculty as they can while hiring as many adjuncts as they can. And yet tuition has gone up astronomically for the past 20 years. The result is that academia will suffer because fewer professors will be able to continue their research as a part of their teaching position. Adjuncts can’t justify doing research unless they take it out of their own personal time in the hopes that it will lead to a tenured position later. This isn’t Marquette’s fault, and the action by my department shows what a class act they are. We have to vote for politicians who aren’t anti-intellectual, who won’t allow colleges to sacrifice quality for money, and who will work with the educational community to establish a fair percentage of professors who must be tenured if a school is to maintain its accreditation.
J. C., Teaching Fellow at Marquette University, at 5:20 am EDT on April 25, 2008
Another viewAs an active supporter of Catholic charities — let me frame this another way —
Except in high-demand areas, teaching should be an avocation. To expect others to financially sacrifice to support another’s lifestyle is unfair.
When a charity opens Day 1 — it does not accept 100,000 clients. It accepts what it can support appropriately.
And as to the basketball coach’s salary: given that sport supports women’s sports and most of the men’s money-losing sports — is the termination of all NCAA sports being proposed? Because that is the logical outcome.
L.L. the charitable Catholic opines that adjuncts should teach as an avocation. As I recall in the pre Vatican II era there were people who taught as an avocation. They were the “religious orders,” Sisters and Brothers who dedicated their lives to teaching for literally subsistance wages in Catholic schools. These religious orders have all but disappeared in our post modern world, and a new source of inexpensive and subserviant labor was created, “adjunct instructors.” Sadly for them, scorned by their administrations and despised and feared by their tenured peers. Perhaps the adjuncts should have worked on their jump shots rather than their useless academic credentials.
Michael Dusik, adjunct instructor at College of DuPage, at 5:00 am EDT on April 26, 2008
Thank you, Dr. Maguire!
I’m thrilled that someone in the tenured ranks has actually acknowledged the poor treatment of adjunct instructors.
If tenured faculty campaigned for more full-time (TT or not) positions in their institutions, they’d also help their own futures. But they don’t because they believe they’re exempt from market forces. However, the market WILL invade their ivory towers, and it won’t be pretty. When they have no grad students—because no one wants to enter a field without job opportunities—their programs will be shut down.
Eternal Adjunct, at 6:10 am EDT on June 7, 2008
Advertisement
Jobs Related to Liberation (of Adjuncts) Theology
or search for jobs directly.
Benefits Manager
San Juan College
The individual will report to the AVP for Human Resources and will manage a variety of benefit programs and services that are ... see job
Employee Relations Manager
University of Oregon
Manages University of Oregon employee and labor relations, including collective bargaining, grievances, progressive ... see job
Manager Equal Opportunity Programs
Yale University
General Purpose
Reporting to the Director, Office for Equal Opportunity Programs, assist in advancing the ... see job
Vice President Human Resources
Masdar Institute of Science and Technology
The Masdar Institute of Science and Technology, dedicated to premier engineering research and the provision of a definitive, ... see job
Student Services Officer
Yale University
General Purpose
Reporting to the Director of Career Development at the Yale School of Management, lead the ... see job
Assistant Director of Human Resources
Cheyney University of Pennsylvania
Situated on rolling hillsides in southern Pennsylvania, Cheyney University, established in 1837, the oldest institution of ... see job
Payroll Specialist
Stetson University College of Law
Responsible for all payroll functions. see job
Director of Professional Development and Training
National-Louis University
Today, NLU serves more than 12,000 students from five Chicago area campuses, in addition to campuses in three states and ... see job
HRIS Systems Administrator
Drexel University
Drexel University, Philadelphia’s Technological University, is seeking an HRIS (Human Resources Information Systems) ... see job
Assistant Dean for Human Resources
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Assume substantial independent senior administrative authority in the Dean’s Office, School of Medicine; for leadership and ... see job
Home
| Sign up | Log in
| About us
| Work for Us
| Press Releases
| Rights and permissions
| Contact us
| Advertise
| Partners
| RSS 
| Podcasts
| Links
| Privacy
| My Account
© Copyright 2008 Inside Higher Ed
As to the basketball coach. A REALLY GOOD basketball coach is hard to find. Adjuncts are as plentiful as pennies. I should know. (I am one.)
bystander, at 7:05 am EDT on April 24, 2008