Administration tightens screw

Tuesday, April 2, 1996

Academic student employees’ grievances get ignored without
contractBy Steve Alexander

Academic student employees ­ teaching assistants, research
assistants, readers and tutors ­ have virtually no means of
objecting to unfair treatment at their place of work.

The UCLA administration has a grievance procedure which flies in
the face of basic democratic rights and leaves academic student
employees utterly powerless. This fact is particularly disturbing
when one considers that these employees are the backbone of the
educational experience for most undergraduates.

There is no penalty against the administration for failure to
meet its own time lines when dealing with a grievance. An academic
student employee could therefore wait indefinitely for a grievance
to be settled. One has to somehow carry on in the face of an
excessive workload, while an error on a paycheck leaves bills
unpaid or a health problem goes uncovered.

On the other hand, if an academic student employee does not meet
university-established deadlines, the grievance is void.

There is no mechanism in university policy for filing group
grievances. The result is that each individual student employee is
confronted with the entire weight of UCLA and lacks any
institutional support from colleagues. Nothing can be accomplished
under such circumstances. A grievance is often felt by academic
student employees in entire departments, and they can do nothing
collectively.

An illustration of this point can be found with graduate
students’ personnel files. Graduate students are not allowed to
look at their personnel files in some departments. What if there is
a mistake in the file or a document that is added unjustifiably? At
the University of Florida, where academic student employees have a
union, an employee may file a grievance to remove items from the
personnel file.

Since the administration creates the grievance procedure, it can
change it unilaterally. If academic student employees were to start
to use the existing grievance procedure and win, the university
could just change the policy.

Such an occurrence actually took place at UC Berkeley and UC
Santa Cruz. When the academic student employee unions began to show
employees how to successfully use university policy, the University
of California unilaterally changed the procedure for the first time
in 30 years. With a union contract, changes in procedure would have
to be negotiated between academic student employees and the
administration.

The issues which are considered grievous are severely limited.
Changes in policy which affect the conditions of one’s employment
are not subject to grievance. Thus, if pay is cut for teaching
assistants, such as the 1.5 percent real pay cut which has taken
place this year, no grievances are permitted.

Furthermore, complaints about work load cannot advance beyond
the departmental level. An academic student employee has no means
by which to have the administration intervene in a department and
make sure that one’s class size does not increase beyond what is
good for the student, the teacher and the educational mission of
UCLA.

Finally, the chancellor is the final, "neutral," binding
arbitrator at the university. An academic student employee cannot
bring in a lawful third party to decide a case. Sexual harassment
exemplifies the lengths to which the university goes to defend
itself before correcting a wrong. Between 1990 and 1993, the UCLA
administration spent $1 million in settling four sexual harassment
suits, according to the Daily Bruin, and incurred nearly $2 million
in legal expenses. This $3 million could have been more wisely
spent if academic student employees were to receive an equitable
hearing when filing a complaint.

Academic student employees need a union contract with the
administration to have any voice at all. This is an issue which
affects not only the lives of academic student employees, but
ultimately the quality of the education received at UCLA.

Alexander is a history teaching assistant.