Carol: Seems like this should be discussed at the SftP conference in April. Scientists are workers too. Larry On 11/24/13 4:30 PM, "Carrol Cox" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >The post below was sent two months ago to the list of the Radical Caucus >(MLA). Along with the posts quoted, it provides an excellent snap shot, it >seems to me, of the condition of college labor today and, by extension, >the >condition of higher education in the U.S. Today and also of K-12 >education, >and by yet further extension, of the condition of the working classes of >the >day in this Age of Austerity, Repression, & Endless Wars. > >There exist radical or left caucuses in a number of academic disciplines; >should not all such caucuses begin to consider the possibility of a >national >"caucus" of some sort involving all campus labor (and not just faculty); >not >a union (though that is needed) but focused on creating a channel for >information exchange among activist groups on various campuses and, >eventually, shared action. > >Carrol > >-----Original Message----- >From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On >Behalf Of Richard Ohmann >Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 9:01 AM >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: [radcaucus] business for the rad caucus > >Your dystopian imagination is terrific, Betsy. Having tried and failed to >find some leverage on this issue for 4 years (on the MLA executive >council), >I'm inclined to agree that the adjunct problem will become the new normal, >in something like the way you posit, plus the outsourcing of grading and >correcting to Bangladesh, etc. This will not be a great development for >the >tenure track faculty, some of whom will be needed to keep Stanford, MIT, >and >Princeton at the top of the elite heap, and to star for MOOCs; but many of >whom will themselves become supernumeraries. Unless . . . . > >d > >On Sep 18, 2013, at 8:12 PM, Margaret Hanzimanolis wrote: > > > Thank you for your comments, Kamala, Carol, and Rich. > > Part time faculty make up 50.1 % of the instructional staff in US >colleges and Universities. They receive about 1/3 the pay, 1/10 of the >benefits, and have no academic freedoms and weak or missing job security. >A lifetime of adjunct work (I am a lifer) yields a loss of roughly 1 >million >dollars (were equal pay for equal work the rule). Since there are 761,990 >PTF (and 761,660 FTF) , that means the students, the institution, the >taxpayer save about 33 billion a year on PTF labor--if you run that out to >wealth statistics, which find women way behind men (78-100 in pay >differential--but men's lifetime earnings are 400% higher ) .. So the >same >for African Americans, whose hourly pay lags 40 cents, but whose lifetime >earnings lag 8000%, (for women). When we come to adjuncts, we have a 60 >cent wage differential, which presumably amounts to about a 12,000 % >lifetime wealth loss. > > We are really talking about trillions of dollars. IN addition, FTF >have much more admin work, many more pressures, so you, as an emeritus, >Rich, lived perhaps in the only golden era (1970-1985) for higher >education! --if we ever had one. I think the structural inequities in >treatment of PTF labor nationally is way, way above (in importance) the >issue of concessions from unions. but locally that might well be the >battle. > > > But the time is past, I think, for useful PTf resistance ( I can't >really explain why this is so--maybe I am just tiring out on it>)--but now >that I have spent a couple months tracking how Lumina is controlling the >curriculum, controlling the accreditation, controlling the HE media (with >student loan profits of its parent corp:) , I am feeling like the adjunct >problem is actually not going to be a problem very soon, as the colleges >and >universities have been herded into common standards, and other >standardizing >practices in the curriculum, which will mean that a 'ready made" >curriculum >can be foisted upon resource starved institutions, and the teachers in all >but the most elite schools will be relegated to para-professionals >monitoring classrooms with big screens. In that sorry narrative, the >adjunct question will have disappeared, because corporations will be >desiging and selling all variety of canned curriculum which will, da da,: >match the canned standards that colleges and universities have been forced >to adopt. > > I give it 15 years and there will be no adjunct problem: everyone >will be an adjunct except for the 15%-30% elites--who will always have >first >rate, F2F education. I don't know where the line will be drawn between >the >live curriculum and the canned: maybe 40% will get the living education, >and 60% the dead and canned. Not sure exactly how it will be staged in... >but in that scenario the 761,000 FTF cohort will be about right... then >the others--those currently on the adjunct track-- will not be teachers, >actually, they will be "classroom monitors" --a kind of glorified >paraprofessional, not functioning as "instructional"personnel--but rather >"support." They will need only a AA in "instructional technology >management" a degree that does not exist yet, but will in about two years. >Tutors, educated in the field, will be available (as freelancers) to the >well off non elite should a student have the means and wish some face to >face tutoring. The school will simply provide "space" --drafty halls with >banging shutters and burned out lightbulbs where these freelancers conduct >their tutoring. The institution will not "pay" the tutor, instead, the >tutor will collect her tutoring fees individually, from each student , >and >do her own photocopying on her own dime or whatever else is needed -- >spend >a few hours boning up on British romanticism so she can customize a >tutoring session for an especially generous (or promising?) student . >It's >really more like a brothel idea with the institution pimping out the >tutor >(formerly the adjunct), collecting a fee from the tutor for being >"referred" >to students needing F2F (like how many hair salons are run--you rent a >"booth"), providing space. Hey maybe this is a movie. > > I hope this is just my own personal nightmare . But the foundation >control of everything in education goes really quite deep. The final >straw >for me was when I discovered how far the accrediting take-over has >progressed already, by these "foundations" that are flush with grotesque >profits from yesteryear, and intent upon developing new "monetizing" >opportunities. The ambitions and goals are quite naked: Privatization of >sectors, services, curriculum, testing, instructional materials, >everything. > > > I hope I am wrong. > > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Rich Gibson <[log in to unmask]> >wrote: > > > Having been a full prof, then emeritus, and now an >adjunct---for fun---it's pretty easy to see how people are being played, >not >only by their bosses, but by their union(s) and by themselves. > > Having been an organizer for the empire's unions, on the >road, for about 1/2 my life, I know how the unions play too. > > And no one working for any of the teacher/prof/schoolworker >unions wants much of anything to do with faculty in colleges and >universities. > > Why? Individualism, arrogance, hubris, racism, opportunism, >nationalism, and sheer stupidity. It is much, much, easier to organize, >and >then trick if necessary, k12 workers. And the k12 world draws a lot more >dues. > > On my campus, the union (an NEA affiliate) which represents >full time and adjunct profs in the same unit (custodial staff in another >union, secretaries in another---US unions divide people more than unite >them) negotiated a 5% pay cut, concessions, after the bosses had taken a >5% >raise (bosses then took a 3% cut and promoted that as sacrifice). > > The union then said concessions would save jobs--when any >idiot should know concessions do not save jobs but like giving blood to a >shark, makes bosses want more. Labor history since around 1970 shows that >as >a fact. > > The day after the contract was ratified, one of the union's >chief bargainers became a dean and about 700 classes were cut, meaning a >few >adjuncts I know lost their homes. It was an utterly corrupt and dishonest >deal, promoted effectively by elected leaders and very well paid NEA staff >(among others, those who helped destroy the Occupy and anti-tuition >movements, for Obama). > > But faculty cannot bring themselves to say: corrupt and >dishonest. Why? The treacle that passes off for collegiality and >tolerance. > > When I informed the union bosses they should declare that >employees and bosses have contradictory interests (they like partner in >production bargaining and most of the faculty did too) and that they >should >organize a committee which united the faculty, other staff, and students >(they being the target of schools, their minds and bodies) working easily >beyond the bounds of the restrictive union contract (labor peace sold for >dues) , set up a multiple area bargaining organization to create >bargaining >minimums that must be met, and plan state wide job actions (maybe 200 ccs >in >CA?), my union bosses went to the campus police complaining that I was a >terrorist. > > Fortunately, the police rejected that claim, as did human >resources (knees shot, I can't terrorize anyone anymore) . > > But the union is, I think, about to propose another >concession package and, having done nothing to organize anyone for the >last >year, it may well be passed. > > "a fight extending well beyond the academy" is right on. > > Everything is in place for a dramatic change in the empire's >corporate state : distrust of govt and capital, some dissent in the >military >(2/3 of those polled opposed the Syria attack--that is new) and a Lot of >anger among vets, etc. > > Of course, the array of enemies, physical and ideological, >is vast. > > The core issue of our time is the reality of the promise of >perpetual imperialist war and booming inequality met by the potential of >mass, integrated, class conscious resistance. > > But, with such small numbers on the radical or revolutionary >left: where to begin--outside and inside the academy? Who are the prime >canaries in the mine that will actually do something, put their bodies out >there? Soldiers. Vets. Students. Immigrants. Dedicated anti-racists of all >kinds. > > I really like and respect the adjuncts who, like me, work so >hard for so little (I have other earned income and don't have to worry too >much at the moment). But I do not think they would be first in my line as >an >organizer. > > I'd be very interested in what others say about that. I've >not been an adjunct long and have some to learn. > > best, > > r > > > > > > On 9/18/2013 3:32 PM, Carrol Cox wrote: > > > Kamala Platt Wednesday, September 18, 2013 2:22 PM >business for the rad > caucus > > The way I see it, adjuncts are "canaries in the >mine" for many academic > issues. If people paid attn. to more of the >abuse/exploitation against > contingent faculty, more things would get nipped in >the bud/butt... > ----------- > > Probably not, at least not without lengthy struggle, >extending well beyond > the academy --for you are absolutely correct in >seeing this issue in a wider > context when you go on to write: > > "That said, I think academics of all persuasions >might do well to note how > closely adjunct struggles > resonate with other temporary and part time workers >and workers outside of > protective legislation in US. > Lets not remain in the Ivory Tower and those on the >fringes/ borders of > academia may connect most with > the "real world" I realize if we are talking about >resolutions, we need to > focus on academia, but we can > utilize that argument to bring along issues in >tandem, in other places." > > Not just with :" other temporary and part time >workers" however but with the > entire work force, including retired workers, and >not just the U.S. but > globally. And this is why I responded as I did to >your first sentence. (I > would suggest that an excellent empirical account of >current global > actuality is to be found in _Our Mutual Friend_ and >_Little Doritt_ -- more > accurate than the NYT at least on the day's events.) > > Capital is still triumphing in the great war that >began with Carter's > appointment of Volcker & his implicit approval of >the murder of Bishop > Romano. > > Carrol > > > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the >Google Groups "Radical Caucus of the MLA" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails >from it, send an email to [log in to unmask] ><mailto:[log in to unmask]> . > To post to this group, send email to >[log in to unmask] > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/radcaucus ><http://groups.google.com/group/radcaucus> . > For more options, visit >https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out ><https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out> . > > > > > > -- > > > ****************************** > Margaret Hanzimanolis, MFA, Ph.D. > 415-516-7949 > > Southern African Travel Narratives > http://hanzer.blogspot.com > > City College of San Francisco > [log in to unmask] > > De Anza College, FHDACCD > Cupertino, CA > [log in to unmask] > > Caņada College, SMCCD > Redwood City, CA > hanzimanolism@ <mailto:[log in to unmask]> smccd.edu > > > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >Groups "Radical Caucus of the MLA" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >send an email to [log in to unmask] > To post to this group, send email to [log in to unmask] > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/radcaucus. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > >-- >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >"Radical Caucus of the MLA" group. >To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >email to [log in to unmask] >To post to this group, send email to [log in to unmask] >Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/radcaucus. >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.