Graduate students debate union issues

Graduate students debate union issues

Students, faculty dissent on SAGE’s purpose, validity

By Betty Song

and Allyssa Lee

Daily Bruin Staff

In the psychology department, heated debates are going on
without a spoken word.

The subject of this unspoken discussion ­ the graduate
employee union and its decision to strike this week.

Roughly two weeks ago, first-year social psychology graduate
student Gregg Gold found a union statement on walkout rules posted
on the mailing room door. After reading this, Gold expressed his
viewpoint on the union and its decision in a written statement of
his own.

What followed was a collection of written exchanges among
departmental graduate students on the door, reflecting a larger
cross-section of mixed opinions about the union and walkout
campus-wide.

Over the last year, the Student Association of Graduate
Employees (SAGE) has repeatedly attempted and failed to gain
voluntary recognition from the chancellor. The chancellor’s refusal
is based on pending legal litigation that could possibly require
him to recognize the union. As a result, union members officially
called for a walkout Wednesday and Thursday.

"This has got to be the last place on earth that needs a union.
I’ve been in (occupations) that have had unions because they need
them," Gold explained. "I’m worried about poisoning the academic
friendship and relationship between faculty and students and the
administration. Faculty in my department invite us to their homes,
insist we call them by their first names ­ in my opinion
you’re not treated as (just) an employee."

But union supporters argue that the employee status will benefit
graduate students.

"A lot of people think it’s about being greedy, but it’s not,"
said second-year social psychology graduate student Joshua
Rabinowitz, who posted a written response to Gold’s letter. "We
don’t want to have anything taken away from us without us having a
say in it. We’re not trying to harm relations with faculty or the
undergraduates ­ we’re dealing more with the administration
(on this issue) than faculty.

"The whole issue comes down to if you feel teaching assistants
and research assistants are employees of the university and should
be treated as such," he continued. "The strike will show people
that we do as much work as any other employee of the
university."

In light of the heightened activity of the union in recent
weeks, graduate students from all sectors of campus vocalized their
mixed feelings on the walkout decision and other issues, reflecting
the lack of a homogeneous graduate community opinion.

While some said they were in support of a union, many do not
agree with various policies and issues under which it was
formed.

"I’m all for unions, generally, when their causes and motives
are legitimate," said Ben Bishin, a political science graduate
student. "I think (SAGE’s) are somewhat contrived. I think they’re
a lot of people that want something to do ­ it’s an activity,
like anything else ­ like softball. I don’t think their issues
are as serious as they make them out to be and I think (the strike
is) going to be a very divisive thing."

A significant issue for graduate students is the recognition of
teaching assistants as university employees.

Many support the union for negotiation power and cite the need
to counter an ongoing view of grad students as "apprentices."

"Apprenticeship ended in 1840, except for us, and apprentices
can be treated any old way. But really, we do most of the work at
the university," said Greg Vanderbilt, a history graduate student,
TA and research assistant.

Another student shared Vanderbilt’s union sentiment and said
that when graduates are getting their Ph.D., they are a student and
an employee. He cited their research as responsible for their
career, and their teaching as their livelihood.

"It’s hazy at this stage because when you’re getting your Ph.D.,
you are a student and an employee, just like the professors," Peck
said.

However, some disagree that graduate students are indeed more
employees than students.

"They’re only here on campus because they’re here as students.
If absent student status, the employee status (doesn’t exist). If
absent employee status, the student status is still there," said
English Professor Edward Condren.

However many believe that this dissent discredits the idea of a
walkout. One grad student also cited the fact that the March
membership meeting, to authorize a walkout, was not attended by one
more than 50 percent of the union’s members, Bishin said.

Despite ideological arguments, many students from the south end
of campus, housing the life and physical sciences, see fundamental
departmental differences in personal funding as a source of their
disagreement.

"The general consensus of the engineering department is that we
really don’t care because we’re getting paid and we get accepted
with funding (grants)," said third-year chemical engineering
student John Klein. "I understand that people are doing as much or
more work than I am and not being rewarded for it. I’ve heard that
one language TA only gets paid $11,000 a year. Obviously I think
that’s unfair, (but) personally I see no need for (a union)."

Although sympathizing with union efforts and the decision to
walk out, some students were unable to take one side or another
after examining the consequences of various issues.

"I really understand that we as graduate students get screwed by
the university if we don’t have a unified voice, however, it seems
unclear what they’re agenda is," said second-year biology doctoral
student Sean Anderson. "A lot of the impetus for the strike comes
from (north) campus, but I don’t feel they understand the
ramifications on physical sciences. A lot of lab courses and
lectures builds upon previous things, (so a strike) has
ramifications beyond that week.

"But if we keep writing letters and asking nicely, it won’t
cause a response. (The walkout) has a much higher probability than
anything else I can think of," Anderson added.

While strongly supporting the union and walkout decision, other
students explained why they believed more students from north
campus would ultimately participate in the strike.

"In the arts you have a lot more TAs. In the sciences you have
people working in laboratories and lab students don’t really affect
too many people," said research assistant and third-year physics
graduate student Ken Wharton. "Nobody but my advisor would know my
presence during the strike. I think it’s unfortunate that it’s come
to this, but I think it’s ridiculous that they haven’t been
recognized (since) legally they’ve gone through the proper
channels."

In addition to mixed opinions from graduate students, many
undergraduates affected by the walkout expressed concern and
uncertainty over the issue.

"I don’t really understand why (they want to do this) because I
haven’t really heard much about it." said first-year biochemistry
student Laura Seltun. "The walkout will help (the union) but it’s
hurting the rest of us undergraduates."

Although faculty hasn’t taken a collective stand concerning the
graduate union’s decision, some members also felt the need for more
clarity on the union’s goals.

"(The walkout) is pitting one class of students against another,
(that’s) maybe why the faculty is not fully behind it," said
psychology Associate Professor Thomas Minor. "I think if the
graduate students have failed some place, it’s not letting the
community know why this is such an issue. The faculty might get
behind it if we knew why having SAGE is critical to the graduate
students."