Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads

Expand Messages
  • questioningadjunct
    questioningadjunct at gmail dot com
    Message 1 of 13 , Jun 28 6:46 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      questioningadjunct at gmail dot com

      --- In SACC-L@yahoogroups.com, "questioningadjunct" <questioningadjunct@...> wrote:
      >
      > Today, I am an anthropologist posting under a pseudonym, given the content herein. I am not looking for sympathy nor anyone telling me that this is the consequence of accepting adjunct employment.
      >
      > Instead, I seek the chance to hear from others who might have had similar experiences and/or who are knowledgeable of resources supporting an argument against the practice described below.
      >
      > If you find yourself in either category after reading this message, please email off-list at questioningadjunct@... as I do not want to overtake the positive nature of this listserv.
      >
      > As those of us in the U.S. know, the Affordable Care Act (some call Obamacare) is going into effect in 2014, but predicates full-time/part-time status on one's employment in 2013. It affects all, regardless of political affiliation and current healthcare insurance/lack of insurance standing.
      >
      > My primary institution is cutting fall classes previously offered for those also teaching summer course(s). In the past, summer classes did not count against adjuncts and currently, summer classes are not counted for the full-timer average workload for the year, even if many of them likewise teach summer courses.
      >
      > The withdrawal of a course (and more, for some adjuncts) did not occur until this month and is being done under the umbrella that federal policy is not clear so they want to schedule conservatively. Although this is an at-will state and a non-union (at least for adjuncts) institution, the administrative message is that they do not want to do this.
      >
      > Others at my institution are being impacted and I feel worse for them as they have families and are much more geographically-limited than I am. Some others are used to the workload and are finding themselves short.
      >
      > Any resources out to counter this decision with? Remember, please email off-list at questioningadjunct@...
      >
    • Sydney Hart
      Dear Questioning Adjunct: Actually, I wish you would keep this discussion public and on-list! I understand the need for anonymity, of course, but I think we
      Message 2 of 13 , Jun 28 6:54 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Questioning Adjunct:

        Actually, I wish you would keep this discussion public and on-list! I understand the need for anonymity, of course, but I think we ALL need to be aware and advocate for adjuncts. I was an adjunct for six years (not counting the time I was in graduate school) before landing my current, full-time position. Now that I have tenure, and therefore some measure of job security, it is my responsibility to stand up for my fellow faculty who are more vulnerable--adjuncts and pre-tenured people.

        At my community college, adjuncts typically make ends meet by teaching classes and working in the tutoring and writing center. The tutoring and writing center jobs pay hourly, the classes are considered salaried. The administration, saying that they are responding to the Fair Labor Standards Act, will soon be restricting my adjunct colleagues to only one job title--adjunct faculty or tutor. This restriction will have a serious, negative impact on peoples' ability to make a living.

        Given that more and more of us will be making our living as adjunct faculty, we all need to be aware of the issues and fight for more equitable treatment.

        Sydney


        Sydney Hart, Ph.D.

        Assistant Professor, Anthropology and Sociology

        Wilbur Wright College

        4300 North Narragansett Avenue

        Chicago, Illinois 60634

        ________________________________
        From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of questioningadjunct [questioningadjunct@...]
        Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 8:46 PM
        To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [SACC-L] Re: Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads



        questioningadjunct at gmail dot com

        --- In SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>, "questioningadjunct" <questioningadjunct@...> wrote:
        >
        > Today, I am an anthropologist posting under a pseudonym, given the content herein. I am not looking for sympathy nor anyone telling me that this is the consequence of accepting adjunct employment.
        >
        > Instead, I seek the chance to hear from others who might have had similar experiences and/or who are knowledgeable of resources supporting an argument against the practice described below.
        >
        > If you find yourself in either category after reading this message, please email off-list at questioningadjunct@... as I do not want to overtake the positive nature of this listserv.
        >
        > As those of us in the U.S. know, the Affordable Care Act (some call Obamacare) is going into effect in 2014, but predicates full-time/part-time status on one's employment in 2013. It affects all, regardless of political affiliation and current healthcare insurance/lack of insurance standing.
        >
        > My primary institution is cutting fall classes previously offered for those also teaching summer course(s). In the past, summer classes did not count against adjuncts and currently, summer classes are not counted for the full-timer average workload for the year, even if many of them likewise teach summer courses.
        >
        > The withdrawal of a course (and more, for some adjuncts) did not occur until this month and is being done under the umbrella that federal policy is not clear so they want to schedule conservatively. Although this is an at-will state and a non-union (at least for adjuncts) institution, the administrative message is that they do not want to do this.
        >
        > Others at my institution are being impacted and I feel worse for them as they have families and are much more geographically-limited than I am. Some others are used to the workload and are finding themselves short.
        >
        > Any resources out to counter this decision with? Remember, please email off-list at questioningadjunct@...
        >





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Mark Lewine
        Having been a full-time faculty leader, dept. head and senate leader for four decades in my college, I supported a culture of informal but professional
        Message 3 of 13 , Jun 28 8:25 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Having been a full-time faculty leader, dept. head and senate leader for four decades in my college, I supported a culture of informal but professional collegiality at my college not limited to anthropology, but in our senate and in governance. In order to foster collegial respect with local universities and to better help my students transfer success, I also served as adjunct for several decades at four local universities in rotation. Treatment at those universities was mixed but mostly collegial, respectful, and professional.

          I must now report and get on record in this exchange, that my home community college has changed its faculty culture with the full-time ‘remnant’ abandoning this sense of collegial friendship and teamwork among full and part-timers, and even treating retirees who dare to return as adjuncts poorly. I am an adjunct now for my community college of 40+ years (2 as student, 40 years as professor/dept. head/director of urban arch. program/chair of Joint Faculty Senate,etc. I am also an adjunct for Kent State, where I got my M.A. in anthropology. Much to my surprise, my home community college full-time colleagues wasted no time in denying me collegial respect once my status changed...I was told that “we do not need your help” in filling positions, and other adjuncts were given preference for hiring with decidedly less credentials and experience, several teaching out of their degreed subfield. On my home campus, the adjuncts that I hired were given as many sections as they were allowed while the ‘program coordinator’, an historian whom I had mentored for tenure when he was new, told me that he was “committed to help them”. I had asked for only one section of a Peoples and Cultures course which I had created, which satisfied two requirements for Cleveland State, our sister university ten minutes away, and had a record of filling four sections per term. I have been given one section in two years.
          When I was asked by a Dean to help create web anthro. courses at Kent State branches near me, I accepted, and sent in the required paperwork, credentials, etc., (though they were already on record, but I was told that they were “lost”). Then the lead professor for anthropology in the branches sent me a series of rude emails, calling me “Mr.” though I sent my vitae with my doctorate to her, signing her name as Dr., and telling me that I was not hired “because my file of credentials was not complete”, ignoring my emails citing the signed delivery of my credentials, and a copy of my four year old record of teaching at one of the branches as an adjunct with credentials accepted. I finally sent the Dean a copy of this abominable record of disrespect and lack of professionalism, and said that it was very surprising to be treated this way when I was in fact a top graduate student of their own department, and I rescinded my letter of application for adjunct status. The dean and the home campus dept. head and the head of Web course development asked me to come in and meet with them. When I did, they apologized in person and in a written statement, and set up a process for me to report to them as I developed anthropology web courses. So I accepted...and I am happy to report that as a lone wolf, I have developed a series of web courses that have filled three months in advance and they are now recruiting others to teach them and have asked me to help interview the new faculty. Yes, I do think that the full-time ‘remnant’ of the contracted faculty resent the “victims” (the adjuncts who are paid 1/5th the average salary per course, have no offices and no paid equipment) and fuel this resentment with their impotent and expensive “association” (I cannot call it a union as it does not make the grade...(no union signs both a “no-strike” clause and a “management rights” clause in order to keep their ‘pro-rata summer pay’)...greed is a powerful force.

          From: questioningadjunct
          Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 9:46 PM
          To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [SACC-L] Re: Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads


          questioningadjunct at gmail dot com

          --- In mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com, "questioningadjunct" <questioningadjunct@...> wrote:
          >
          > Today, I am an anthropologist posting under a pseudonym, given the content herein. I am not looking for sympathy nor anyone telling me that this is the consequence of accepting adjunct employment.
          >
          > Instead, I seek the chance to hear from others who might have had similar experiences and/or who are knowledgeable of resources supporting an argument against the practice described below.
          >
          > If you find yourself in either category after reading this message, please email off-list at questioningadjunct@... as I do not want to overtake the positive nature of this listserv.
          >
          > As those of us in the U.S. know, the Affordable Care Act (some call Obamacare) is going into effect in 2014, but predicates full-time/part-time status on one's employment in 2013. It affects all, regardless of political affiliation and current healthcare insurance/lack of insurance standing.
          >
          > My primary institution is cutting fall classes previously offered for those also teaching summer course(s). In the past, summer classes did not count against adjuncts and currently, summer classes are not counted for the full-timer average workload for the year, even if many of them likewise teach summer courses.
          >
          > The withdrawal of a course (and more, for some adjuncts) did not occur until this month and is being done under the umbrella that federal policy is not clear so they want to schedule conservatively. Although this is an at-will state and a non-union (at least for adjuncts) institution, the administrative message is that they do not want to do this.
          >
          > Others at my institution are being impacted and I feel worse for them as they have families and are much more geographically-limited than I am. Some others are used to the workload and are finding themselves short.
          >
          > Any resources out to counter this decision with? Remember, please email off-list at questioningadjunct@...
          >





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Andrew Petto
          I just want to clarify one thing in this issue. ***THIS IS NOT A PHENOMENON NEW OR UNIQUE TO THE ACA!!!*** Sorry for shouting, but I want to make that clear.
          Message 4 of 13 , Jun 29 9:37 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            I just want to clarify one thing in this issue. ***THIS IS NOT A
            PHENOMENON NEW OR UNIQUE TO THE ACA!!!***

            Sorry for shouting, but I want to make that clear.

            In my 4 years as an adjunct ONLY, my college kept me at 47% because
            state and county law required (in those days) that a 50% employment
            carry all benefits. It went so far as assigning a tenured faculty member
            to teach one of my lab sections, so that I would not go over the 50%
            line. This was in the mid-90s, a long, LONG time before the ACA. We did
            have a union there, but the full-timers voted NOT to include the
            part-timers in their local; we had to form our own local (of the same
            union on the same campus). In the end, that turned out to be a good
            thing, since the advocacy for part-timers' issues was more energetic and
            focused.

            In the university where I taught after that (private, non-unionized),
            adjuncts had to teach 3 courses per semester in order to receive
            benefits (Full-time faculty in our division taught 3 one semester and 4
            in the other until the last couple of years I was there, and then it
            was and 3). So, of course, the U offered adjuncts 5 courses a year (3
            in one semester; 2 in another; and summers were off the books). And
            this was 1998-2004, so, again, long LONG before the ACA was even 'dreamt
            of in [our] philosophies' so to speak.

            Despicable corporate behavior WRT part-time employees is not the result
            of the ACA; the ACA is just the latest excuse for off-loading costs to
            someone else to improve the bottom line.

            I do not mean to downplay the effect of this on real people; I have been
            there (as have many on this list). But blaming the ACA is just taking
            the Koolaid. We really need to call out higher ed administration on
            this. Making their adjuncts work harder for fewer benefits and lower pay
            is just not a viable strategy for a healthy institution.

            And those of us in full-time, benefit-receiving positions need to step
            up, too; not to do the thing that our full-timers' union did to us back
            in the 90s, but to recognize that the mistreatment of adjuncts affects
            all of us in the organization (Just point out to them how often they
            grumble about how poorly taught their students are in the intro courses
            taught often by adjuncts; and ask them to connect the dots between low
            pay, lack of benefits, and having to travel to several campuses
            sometimes in a single day). Is this any way to run a university?

            Anj

            On 2013-06-28 20:37, questioningadjunct wrote:
            >
            >
            > As those of us in the U.S. know, the Affordable Care Act (some call
            > Obamacare) is going into effect in 2014, but predicates
            > full-time/part-time status on one's employment in 2013. It affects
            > all, regardless of political affiliation and current healthcare
            > insurance/lack of insurance standing.
            >
            > My primary institution is cutting fall classes previously offered for
            > those also teaching summer course(s). In the past, summer classes did
            > not count against adjuncts and currently, summer classes are not
            > counted for the full-timer average workload for the year, even if many
            > of them likewise teach summer courses.
            >

            --

            Andrew J Petto, PhD
            Senior Lecturer
            Department of Biological Sciences
            University of Wisconsin -- Milwaukee
            PO Box 413
            Milwaukee WI 53201-0413
            CapTel Line: 1-877-243-2823
            Telephone: 414-229-6784
            FAX: 414-229-3926
            https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/index.htm

            Could you be a teacher?
            <https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/Be_a_teacher.mp3>

            *************
            Now Available!!! Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism.
            https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/scc2.htm
            *************



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Nikki Ives
            I ll throw my 2 cents into the ring here.  I m adjunct at two places - one of which I also have a part-time office job.  One place, UMUC, has a history of
            Message 5 of 13 , Jun 29 1:33 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              I'll throw my 2 cents into the ring here.  I'm adjunct at two places - one of which I also have a part-time office job.  One place, UMUC, has a history of relying on adjunct faculty and they have offered health insurance to adjuncts for as long as I have been there.  I asked if this is going to allow them to avoid some of the issues other colleges are facing with the new ACA rules.  I did not get a straight answer.

              I asked at the other place I work, PGCC, what is going to happen.  Again, I'm not getting a straight answer.  From what I understand, full time faculty are probably going to be teaching more classes so that adjunct faculty don't exceed the hourly limit that would require health insurance under ACA.

              I have heard one way to deal with this is for adjunct faculty to work at
              multiple institutions so that they can continue to teach as many
              classes as they hope to teach and not exceed the number of hours
              required to offer health care. I took the opportunity when I had her ear to bring this up with our
              president - her response was that we have about the same amount of
              adjunct faculty as other colleges in the area ??? and she mentioned she heard some places were
              working together to pool adjunct faculty.  Nice!  They'll work together
              to ensure they don't have to offer health insurance to their already
              exploited workers.    She didn't really address what PGCC is going to do about the ACA and she quickly changed the subject.

              My supervisor also asked the Vice-President of Administrative Services - the guy who is in charge of the college budget the same question - and she did not get a straight answer either.

              I brought up with our adjunct liaison to the faculty senate that I thought the college should see this as an opportunity to reassess the college's reliance on adjunct faculty and I expressed my disappointment with the fact that so many people see this as a negative when it is actually a positive thing when more people in a society have access to health care.  That guy's response was that he participated in some survey and found that most adjunct faculty work as adjuncts because they like teaching ??? that was a pretty weird response - and he also has not given me a straight answer about what the college plans to do. 

              My point?  Nobody around here seems to want to talk about it!!  It is top-secret information.  I did not notice any changes in staffing for the fall semester though.

              This is a great example of capitalism. I think I'll use it in my cultural class.  Even though many colleges and universities are non-profit or not-for-profit institutes, policies and procedures are still based on capitalist business models - maximize profit, minimize expenses, yadda, yadda, yadda.  It is just annoying to me that everyone is so focused on further exploiting adjunct faculty rather than seeing this as an opportunity to either hire more full-time faculty or offer adjunct faculty health care benefits.  But I suppose that is because budgets are being slashed and the funds are just not there (that is the line I keep hearing, anyway).

              This is why I have kept the office-job.  I HATE it.  It is the pits.  I would much rather just teach.  But, it is simply impossible to make ends meet on adjunct faculty salary and the work is just too inconsistent.  Gotta have that regular paycheck.

              I do want to say that while I realize the regulations of the ACA is going to screw a lot of adjunct faculty (including myself) and other part-time workers in this country over - overall, I think it is a good thing that we are moving in the direction of ensuring everyone has access to health care.  It may take a really long time for positive results to be seen - but after living in a country for three years with universal health care (Japan), I think it is a good thing for society as a whole to have a system in place that allows all citizens to access health care (not just emergency-room healthcare).

              Okie dokie - my two cents.  Not sure how much or how well my ramblings here furthered the discussion but, just thought I'd share. 

              Nikki







              >________________________________
              > From: Andrew Petto <ajpetto@...>
              >To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com -
              >Cc: questioningadjunct <questioningadjunct@...>
              >Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2013 12:37 PM
              >Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads
              >
              >
              >

              >I just want to clarify one thing in this issue. ***THIS IS NOT A
              >PHENOMENON NEW OR UNIQUE TO THE ACA!!!***
              >
              >Sorry for shouting, but I want to make that clear.
              >
              >In my 4 years as an adjunct ONLY, my college kept me at 47% because
              >state and county law required (in those days) that a 50% employment
              >carry all benefits. It went so far as assigning a tenured faculty member
              >to teach one of my lab sections, so that I would not go over the 50%
              >line. This was in the mid-90s, a long, LONG time before the ACA. We did
              >have a union there, but the full-timers voted NOT to include the
              >part-timers in their local; we had to form our own local (of the same
              >union on the same campus). In the end, that turned out to be a good
              >thing, since the advocacy for part-timers' issues was more energetic and
              >focused.
              >
              >In the university where I taught after that (private, non-unionized),
              >adjuncts had to teach 3 courses per semester in order to receive
              >benefits (Full-time faculty in our division taught 3 one semester and 4
              >in the other until the last couple of years I was there, and then it
              >was and 3). So, of course, the U offered adjuncts 5 courses a year (3
              >in one semester; 2 in another; and summers were off the books). And
              >this was 1998-2004, so, again, long LONG before the ACA was even 'dreamt
              >of in [our] philosophies' so to speak.
              >
              >Despicable corporate behavior WRT part-time employees is not the result
              >of the ACA; the ACA is just the latest excuse for off-loading costs to
              >someone else to improve the bottom line.
              >
              >I do not mean to downplay the effect of this on real people; I have been
              >there (as have many on this list). But blaming the ACA is just taking
              >the Koolaid. We really need to call out higher ed administration on
              >this. Making their adjuncts work harder for fewer benefits and lower pay
              >is just not a viable strategy for a healthy institution.
              >
              >And those of us in full-time, benefit-receiving positions need to step
              >up, too; not to do the thing that our full-timers' union did to us back
              >in the 90s, but to recognize that the mistreatment of adjuncts affects
              >all of us in the organization (Just point out to them how often they
              >grumble about how poorly taught their students are in the intro courses
              >taught often by adjuncts; and ask them to connect the dots between low
              >pay, lack of benefits, and having to travel to several campuses
              >sometimes in a single day). Is this any way to run a university?
              >
              >Anj
              >
              >On 2013-06-28 20:37, questioningadjunct wrote:
              >>
              >>
              >> As those of us in the U.S. know, the Affordable Care Act (some call
              >> Obamacare) is going into effect in 2014, but predicates
              >> full-time/part-time status on one's employment in 2013. It affects
              >> all, regardless of political affiliation and current healthcare
              >> insurance/lack of insurance standing.
              >>
              >> My primary institution is cutting fall classes previously offered for
              >> those also teaching summer course(s). In the past, summer classes did
              >> not count against adjuncts and currently, summer classes are not
              >> counted for the full-timer average workload for the year, even if many
              >> of them likewise teach summer courses.
              >>
              >
              >--
              >
              >Andrew J Petto, PhD
              >Senior Lecturer
              >Department of Biological Sciences
              >University of Wisconsin -- Milwaukee
              >PO Box 413
              >Milwaukee WI 53201-0413
              >CapTel Line: 1-877-243-2823
              >Telephone: 414-229-6784
              >FAX: 414-229-3926
              >https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/index.htm
              >
              >Could you be a teacher?
              ><https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/Be_a_teacher.mp3>
              >
              >*************
              >Now Available!!! Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism.
              >https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/scc2.htm
              >*************
              >
              >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Gilliland, Mary
              I can’t resist this discussion. It is very, very important, and I have appreciated each and every post. It is heart-wrenching, but as anthropologists I
              Message 6 of 13 , Jun 29 1:46 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                I can’t resist this discussion. It is very, very important, and I have appreciated each and every post. It is heart-wrenching, but as anthropologists I know we all see the significance at multiple levels. It affects OUR lives and livlihoods, but it is a deep social issue in our country.

                I actually have a question rather than a story to share, and that is whether anyone has thought of bringing this to the attention of our various accrediting bodies? The large reliance on adjuncts and other temporary & part-time workers, and now the adjustment of their loads to avoid providing health insurance under new federal laws are both issues/concerns. Because most of the regional accrediting bodies are concerned with shared governance, the fact that this is a top secret matter at least as described by Nikki, but probably elsewhere, might be a matter of concern. I’m thinking the accrediting groups might want to be aware that these sorts of things are going on, as they are likely to be going on in many institutions.

                I think this may be an opportunity for community colleges, who are seriously underfunded and depend a great deal on temporary workers, to bring the matter to their state and local governments. We are charged with a really important job, we are the institutions that are supposed to be able to provide affordable education to an underserved public, but are we doing so in a way that 1) creates an underclass within our own institutions (the underserved, serving the underserved?), and are we doing so in a way that realistically does help those who are most socioeconomically disadvantaged really move into a living wage sort of job? Raising this kind of awareness, though, is going to require rallying administrators, entire institutions, and the public they serve.

                Mary Kay Gilliland
                Pima Community College
                Tucson



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Jo Rainie
                In the San Francisco Bay Area, college administrators work with faculty union negotiators to agree on new employment contracts. These full time faculty
                Message 7 of 13 , Jun 29 3:57 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  In the San Francisco Bay Area, college administrators work
                  with faculty union negotiators to agree on new employment contracts. These full
                  time faculty negotiators may or may not negotiate benefits for adjuncts.
                  Colleges don’t care – they have a budgeted amount of money to work with and they
                  know they will end up in some negotiated settlement with the union, based on
                  the demands of the union. And, the union is made up of faculty members. In
                  other words, it is the full time faculty who determine what salaries and
                  benefits are given to adjuncts. The more that is given to adjuncts, the less
                  full time faculty receive.  Some colleges
                  in my area offer adjuncts parity – in wages (percentage of full time salary,
                  based on load) and in benefits (although adjuncts may pay more for benefits).
                  Other colleges, like Ohlone, have never offered  benefits and pay faculty far
                  below other colleges in our area. On the other hand, our full time faculty are
                  at the top of the pay scale for the state. They are very talented negotiators.

                  When I read discussion postings about adjunct positions and
                  benefits, I am always reminded that the plight of adjuncts is determined,
                  primarily, by their full time colleagues. I have watched so many faculty, at so
                  many colleges, do basically nothing about adjunct working conditions.
                  I think most adjuncts have learned to accept that full time faculty are busy dealing with more
                  important, pressing issues…

                  My local retired full time faculty friends, who have come back to
                  teach as adjuncts, often complain bitterly about how they are being treated. It
                  always gives me a good laugh. And, yes, I like to remind them that they were in
                  positions of power and could have worked to make this right, and they chose not
                  to act. Therefore, what do they expect?

                  To implement the Affordable Care Act, and to keep adjuncts
                  at their current levels, full time faculty will need to negotiate with college
                  administrators - on behalf of adjuncts vs. their own self interests. It will be
                  interesting to see if they are willing to step up.


                  Jo Rainie Rodgers
                  Ohlone College
                  Fremont, CA



                  ________________________________
                  From: Andrew Petto <ajpetto@...>
                  To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                  Cc: questioningadjunct <questioningadjunct@...>
                  Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2013 9:37 AM
                  Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads



                   
                  I just want to clarify one thing in this issue. ***THIS IS NOT A
                  PHENOMENON NEW OR UNIQUE TO THE ACA!!!***

                  Sorry for shouting, but I want to make that clear.

                  In my 4 years as an adjunct ONLY, my college kept me at 47% because
                  state and county law required (in those days) that a 50% employment
                  carry all benefits. It went so far as assigning a tenured faculty member
                  to teach one of my lab sections, so that I would not go over the 50%
                  line. This was in the mid-90s, a long, LONG time before the ACA. We did
                  have a union there, but the full-timers voted NOT to include the
                  part-timers in their local; we had to form our own local (of the same
                  union on the same campus). In the end, that turned out to be a good
                  thing, since the advocacy for part-timers' issues was more energetic and
                  focused.

                  In the university where I taught after that (private, non-unionized),
                  adjuncts had to teach 3 courses per semester in order to receive
                  benefits (Full-time faculty in our division taught 3 one semester and 4
                  in the other until the last couple of years I was there, and then it
                  was and 3). So, of course, the U offered adjuncts 5 courses a year (3
                  in one semester; 2 in another; and summers were off the books). And
                  this was 1998-2004, so, again, long LONG before the ACA was even 'dreamt
                  of in [our] philosophies' so to speak.

                  Despicable corporate behavior WRT part-time employees is not the result
                  of the ACA; the ACA is just the latest excuse for off-loading costs to
                  someone else to improve the bottom line.

                  I do not mean to downplay the effect of this on real people; I have been
                  there (as have many on this list). But blaming the ACA is just taking
                  the Koolaid. We really need to call out higher ed administration on
                  this. Making their adjuncts work harder for fewer benefits and lower pay
                  is just not a viable strategy for a healthy institution.

                  And those of us in full-time, benefit-receiving positions need to step
                  up, too; not to do the thing that our full-timers' union did to us back
                  in the 90s, but to recognize that the mistreatment of adjuncts affects
                  all of us in the organization (Just point out to them how often they
                  grumble about how poorly taught their students are in the intro courses
                  taught often by adjuncts; and ask them to connect the dots between low
                  pay, lack of benefits, and having to travel to several campuses
                  sometimes in a single day). Is this any way to run a university?

                  Anj

                  On 2013-06-28 20:37, questioningadjunct wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > As those of us in the U.S. know, the Affordable Care Act (some call
                  > Obamacare) is going into effect in 2014, but predicates
                  > full-time/part-time status on one's employment in 2013. It affects
                  > all, regardless of political affiliation and current healthcare
                  > insurance/lack of insurance standing.
                  >
                  > My primary institution is cutting fall classes previously offered for
                  > those also teaching summer course(s). In the past, summer classes did
                  > not count against adjuncts and currently, summer classes are not
                  > counted for the full-timer average workload for the year, even if many
                  > of them likewise teach summer courses.
                  >

                  --

                  Andrew J Petto, PhD
                  Senior Lecturer
                  Department of Biological Sciences
                  University of Wisconsin -- Milwaukee
                  PO Box 413
                  Milwaukee WI 53201-0413
                  CapTel Line: 1-877-243-2823
                  Telephone: 414-229-6784
                  FAX: 414-229-3926
                  https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/index.htm

                  Could you be a teacher?
                  <https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/Be_a_teacher.mp3>

                  *************
                  Now Available!!! Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism.
                  https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/scc2.htm
                  *************

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Philip Stein
                  Things work a bit differently in Los Angeles. The LACCD is to a degree controlled by the union. It is a large district with board members elected at large, so
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jun 29 4:21 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Things work a bit differently in Los Angeles. The LACCD is to a degree controlled by the union. It is a large district with board members elected at large, so it is virtually impossible for someone to be elected to the board without the blessing of the union (although it does happen--it happened this Spring). All union members have one vote whether the member is full time or part time, but over the years the union leadership has centered its attention on the adjuncts, who make up a large percentage of the voting membership. Adjuncts have been elected to district-wide union offices and they participate fully in contract negotiations. The buzz word is equity. Adjuncts serve on the college's academic senate (there are 3 positions reserved for adjuncts, plus adjusts can serve as department reps), etc. In fact, adjuncts receive a higher hourly rate than full timers with an hourly class as a extra class, and adjuncts get paid for keeping office hours.
                    Insurance is available at a certain level, but I don't know the details.
                     
                    Balancing this is adherence to state law that requires that 75% of the classes be taught by full-time instructors, although there are a lot of loopholes. Because of this, and in spite of budget issues, we just hired 2 new anthropologists to replace the 4 that have retired over the past 4 years. (We now have 3 full-timers, down from 5.)  It's cheaper to hire a tenure track faculty than to pay the state fine. 
                     
                    Phil

                    --- On Sat, 6/29/13, Jo Rainie <jo_rainie@...> wrote:


                    From: Jo Rainie <jo_rainie@...>
                    Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads
                    To: "SACC-L@yahoogroups.com" <SACC-L@yahoogroups.com>
                    Date: Saturday, June 29, 2013, 3:57 PM



                     





                    In the San Francisco Bay Area, college administrators work
                    with faculty union negotiators to agree on new employment contracts. These full
                    time faculty negotiators may or may not negotiate benefits for adjuncts.
                    Colleges don’t care – they have a budgeted amount of money to work with and they
                    know they will end up in some negotiated settlement with the union, based on
                    the demands of the union. And, the union is made up of faculty members. In
                    other words, it is the full time faculty who determine what salaries and
                    benefits are given to adjuncts. The more that is given to adjuncts, the less
                    full time faculty receive.  Some colleges
                    in my area offer adjuncts parity – in wages (percentage of full time salary,
                    based on load) and in benefits (although adjuncts may pay more for benefits).
                    Other colleges, like Ohlone, have never offered  benefits and pay faculty far
                    below other colleges in our area. On the other hand, our full time faculty are
                    at the top of the pay scale for the state. They are very talented negotiators.

                    When I read discussion postings about adjunct positions and
                    benefits, I am always reminded that the plight of adjuncts is determined,
                    primarily, by their full time colleagues. I have watched so many faculty, at so
                    many colleges, do basically nothing about adjunct working conditions.
                    I think most adjuncts have learned to accept that full time faculty are busy dealing with more
                    important, pressing issues…

                    My local retired full time faculty friends, who have come back to
                    teach as adjuncts, often complain bitterly about how they are being treated. It
                    always gives me a good laugh. And, yes, I like to remind them that they were in
                    positions of power and could have worked to make this right, and they chose not
                    to act. Therefore, what do they expect?

                    To implement the Affordable Care Act, and to keep adjuncts
                    at their current levels, full time faculty will need to negotiate with college
                    administrators - on behalf of adjuncts vs. their own self interests. It will be
                    interesting to see if they are willing to step up.

                    Jo Rainie Rodgers
                    Ohlone College
                    Fremont, CA

                    ________________________________
                    From: Andrew Petto <ajpetto@...>
                    To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                    Cc: questioningadjunct <questioningadjunct@...>
                    Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2013 9:37 AM
                    Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads


                     
                    I just want to clarify one thing in this issue. ***THIS IS NOT A
                    PHENOMENON NEW OR UNIQUE TO THE ACA!!!***

                    Sorry for shouting, but I want to make that clear.

                    In my 4 years as an adjunct ONLY, my college kept me at 47% because
                    state and county law required (in those days) that a 50% employment
                    carry all benefits. It went so far as assigning a tenured faculty member
                    to teach one of my lab sections, so that I would not go over the 50%
                    line. This was in the mid-90s, a long, LONG time before the ACA. We did
                    have a union there, but the full-timers voted NOT to include the
                    part-timers in their local; we had to form our own local (of the same
                    union on the same campus). In the end, that turned out to be a good
                    thing, since the advocacy for part-timers' issues was more energetic and
                    focused.

                    In the university where I taught after that (private, non-unionized),
                    adjuncts had to teach 3 courses per semester in order to receive
                    benefits (Full-time faculty in our division taught 3 one semester and 4
                    in the other until the last couple of years I was there, and then it
                    was and 3). So, of course, the U offered adjuncts 5 courses a year (3
                    in one semester; 2 in another; and summers were off the books). And
                    this was 1998-2004, so, again, long LONG before the ACA was even 'dreamt
                    of in [our] philosophies' so to speak.

                    Despicable corporate behavior WRT part-time employees is not the result
                    of the ACA; the ACA is just the latest excuse for off-loading costs to
                    someone else to improve the bottom line.

                    I do not mean to downplay the effect of this on real people; I have been
                    there (as have many on this list). But blaming the ACA is just taking
                    the Koolaid. We really need to call out higher ed administration on
                    this. Making their adjuncts work harder for fewer benefits and lower pay
                    is just not a viable strategy for a healthy institution.

                    And those of us in full-time, benefit-receiving positions need to step
                    up, too; not to do the thing that our full-timers' union did to us back
                    in the 90s, but to recognize that the mistreatment of adjuncts affects
                    all of us in the organization (Just point out to them how often they
                    grumble about how poorly taught their students are in the intro courses
                    taught often by adjuncts; and ask them to connect the dots between low
                    pay, lack of benefits, and having to travel to several campuses
                    sometimes in a single day). Is this any way to run a university?

                    Anj

                    On 2013-06-28 20:37, questioningadjunct wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > As those of us in the U.S. know, the Affordable Care Act (some call
                    > Obamacare) is going into effect in 2014, but predicates
                    > full-time/part-time status on one's employment in 2013. It affects
                    > all, regardless of political affiliation and current healthcare
                    > insurance/lack of insurance standing.
                    >
                    > My primary institution is cutting fall classes previously offered for
                    > those also teaching summer course(s). In the past, summer classes did
                    > not count against adjuncts and currently, summer classes are not
                    > counted for the full-timer average workload for the year, even if many
                    > of them likewise teach summer courses.
                    >

                    --

                    Andrew J Petto, PhD
                    Senior Lecturer
                    Department of Biological Sciences
                    University of Wisconsin -- Milwaukee
                    PO Box 413
                    Milwaukee WI 53201-0413
                    CapTel Line: 1-877-243-2823
                    Telephone: 414-229-6784
                    FAX: 414-229-3926
                    https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/index.htm

                    Could you be a teacher?
                    <https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/Be_a_teacher.mp3>

                    *************
                    Now Available!!! Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism.
                    https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/scc2.htm
                    *************

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Tim Sullivan
                    Okay, now it is my turn. I will also post to the off SACC L address later. At DCCCD, (Dallas County) while each campus is relatively autonomous for SACS
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jun 29 6:03 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Okay, now it is my turn. I will also post to the off SACC L address
                      later.
                      At DCCCD, (Dallas County) while each campus is relatively autonomous
                      for SACS accreditation, and other decisions, we are still a 'district'
                      for purposes of policy and faculty hiring, etc. It is no secret in our
                      institution. We had been allowed to have adjuncts teach up to four 3
                      hour classes, or 2 four hour (those with labs) and one 3 hour section.
                      We had just completed our fall schedules this spring (just before SACC
                      Fest), to then hear in the following week, that we had to cut back to no
                      more than 7 hours (one four and one 3 hour class or two 3 hour
                      sections). We have not had any comments that summer employment would
                      count against the number of teaching hours.
                      We were visited for accreditation this past year, and I raised a
                      specific point about full/adjunct faculty ratio with one of the visiting
                      team members, with no reply. I was not asking about this particular
                      issue; at that time, in January, it had not yet surfaced. My point is
                      that our accrediting agency (Southern Association or SACS), seems to be
                      unconcerned about this particular issue, or anything related.
                      Of course. Texas is a 'Right to Work' state, with no unions, but our
                      Faculty Association raised a LOUD outcry -- it affects our own workloads
                      as well as the working climate for our adjuncts. We have many very loyal
                      adjuncts who are now having to figure out their next steps, and we have
                      already lost some. In fact, I am currently trying to fill three part
                      time positions as we speak. Our Faculty Association leadership is
                      working on a position statement this summer, but we shall see what is to
                      become of all this.
                      I can go on about the cheapening of our public education, and the
                      McDonaldization of higher ed, but you have all heard and/or said it all
                      already. I do think, however, that we need to keep the awareness level
                      high. In fact, I am considering a draft to my own local state
                      representative right now, as she is a strong supporter of education in
                      our state. She does have some other issues going on right now, and
                      perhaps some of you may have heard of her due to her recent filibuster
                      in Texas Senate on other issues: Wendy Davis.
                      Tim
                      Timothy L. Sullivan, Ph.D.
                      Professor of Anthropology
                      Richland College
                      12800 Abrams Rd.
                      Dallas, TX 75243

                      972-238-6959
                      tsullivan@...
                      >>> "Gilliland, Mary" 06/29/13 3:46 PM >>>
                      I can’t resist this discussion. It is very, very important, and I have
                      appreciated each and every post. It is heart-wrenching, but as
                      anthropologists I know we all see the significance at multiple levels.
                      It affects OUR lives and livlihoods, but it is a deep social issue in
                      our country.

                      I actually have a question rather than a story to share, and that is
                      whether anyone has thought of bringing this to the attention of our
                      various accrediting bodies? The large reliance on adjuncts and other
                      temporary & part-time workers, and now the adjustment of their loads to
                      avoid providing health insurance under new federal laws are both
                      issues/concerns. Because most of the regional accrediting bodies are
                      concerned with shared governance, the fact that this is a top secret
                      matter at least as described by Nikki, but probably elsewhere, might be
                      a matter of concern. I’m thinking the accrediting groups might want to
                      be aware that these sorts of things are going on, as they are likely to
                      be going on in many institutions.

                      I think this may be an opportunity for community colleges, who are
                      seriously underfunded and depend a great deal on temporary workers, to
                      bring the matter to their state and local governments. We are charged
                      with a really important job, we are the institutions that are supposed
                      to be able to provide affordable education to an underserved public, but
                      are we doing so in a way that 1) creates an underclass within our own
                      institutions (the underserved, serving the underserved?), and are we
                      doing so in a way that realistically does help those who are most
                      socioeconomically disadvantaged job? Raising this kind of awareness, though, is going to require
                      rallying administrators, entire institutions, and the public they serve.

                      Mary Kay Gilliland
                      Pima Community College
                      Tucson



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Mark Lewine
                      Jo makes an important point, most of which I agree with...full-time faculty and their associations in MOST cases have either ignored part-time or adjunct
                      Message 10 of 13 , Jun 29 10:46 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Jo makes an important point, most of which I agree with...full-time faculty and their associations in MOST cases have either ignored part-time or adjunct faculty status and role, as well as anything else that happens to any other group in the college system. In fact, during my last twenty years, faculty stopped paying attention to anything but salaries and benefits for them...allowing a total take-over of what used to be called by the
                        AAUP, the “Red Book Principles” on faculty rights and responsibilities in the academy: curriculum and instruction. College presidents and Boards subscribed to those principles and called it our “responsibility” as faculty.

                        During the 1960’s and ‘70’s with this academic culture of community colleges we had a Faculty Senate that was more powerful and respected by the Board and administration than any union that we had in subsequent years...context is the key, Jo, and most of it can be viewed first in California, where it first took hold! The open door community college mission was respected by most, and the key role of the faculty as central and as leaders for curricula and instruction was expected by all...we did not need an AAUP “Red Book” statement of principles. Our first President, Charles Chapman, came to us from California, interviewed each faculty member and made sure that we were committed to students first, curricular and instructional quality next, and he would retell this to the entire college in his yearly address at the beginning of the year: “if you are not spending every work effort to support the teacher and student in the classroom, you are not doing your job”, he would say. (and I would remind the campus cop when writing me a ticket). Later, in the ‘80’s, we got our first corporate president, who stated that we had grown too large for the informal system and culture, built a District administration building away from the faculty and students, and he started making policy for every category of employee to be represented, except those staff who worked directly for him and the campus presidents. He wanted all formal systems, and called it “infrastructure”...as it turned out, our faculty senate had been so successful in governance dialogue, and fostering the collegial culture, that our supportive Board and original President had built us a manageable workload of three 4 hour courses per term, with faculty governance and office hours expected as part of the load. We, with our Senate, decided with Deans on class size, room sizes, and our salaries were more than competitive with public state universities without bargaining for them (we were growing in enrollment and campus size)-context. A part-time faculty role was limited to new curricula on a trial basis, and if that proved in demand, the part-time role was expected to become a lectureship, then a full-time tenure track position.

                        Quickly after the ‘80’s, however, when enrollment leveled off (context again) and ‘district’ administration took charge of college “infrastructure”, the central planner and planning system took control of everything, including curricula and instruction. There was a brief fight over this change, (as Faculty Senate Chair, I worked with organizers for actual unions in my state to recognize our Senate as leading org. for governance and union for pay and benefits) I lost completely to the AAUP organizers and supporters (faculty who did not want “to be associated with the Teamsters” is what I heard...yeah, well, they got a ‘union’ who gave into clauses agreeing to no strike or sympathy strike and a “management rights clause” for administration to do anything they want to by calling it “on behalf of the taxpayers”...including what kind of boards and chairs and tables in the classroom...(that’s when I knew we had become ‘specialists’ who only owned student grading as power). That last clause saw us move to 5 courses per term with more soon on the way. (Texas has 7?) Next came the last gasp fights: workload and full-time/part-time ratios...After losing everything, including faculty hiring, governance, curricula, (hello STEM, g’bye anthro) we fought for the last stand over the “60-40 ratio” full-time to part-time...we found that the admins had argued for this ration in the beginning to bring in the part-time hires as permanent part-timers (adjuncts still without contracts and without pay equity and without office space and hours for students, requiring a change in mission language(?!)...So, the taxpayer just wants to pay less and thus gets less from teachers and their ignored students? So Jo, there was strong faculty efforts in the ‘60’s and ‘70’s to participate in all meaningful activities related to student learning, especially curricula and instruction, and we were expected to do so by the early presidents and deans...with growth of students came multiple campuses, districts, and formal organization...Weber used to write about how bureaucracy kills democracy through systems that choke the life out of any organization. Once administration learned that when “infrastructure” in the organization needs development, budget, hiring, review, etc., that’s when they learned that if they keep feeding that theme, they stay in control of the organization. That has been going on for 30 years...and it has happened to doctors in hospitals. We are not the only service profession suffering here...the only difference is physician assistants and nurses make much more than our “adjuncts”. But they have no say, no authority.

                        From: Tim Sullivan
                        Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2013 9:03 PM
                        To: mkgilliland@... ; SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads


                        Okay, now it is my turn. I will also post to the off SACC L address
                        later.
                        At DCCCD, (Dallas County) while each campus is relatively autonomous
                        for SACS accreditation, and other decisions, we are still a 'district'
                        for purposes of policy and faculty hiring, etc. It is no secret in our
                        institution. We had been allowed to have adjuncts teach up to four 3
                        hour classes, or 2 four hour (those with labs) and one 3 hour section.
                        We had just completed our fall schedules this spring (just before SACC
                        Fest), to then hear in the following week, that we had to cut back to no
                        more than 7 hours (one four and one 3 hour class or two 3 hour
                        sections). We have not had any comments that summer employment would
                        count against the number of teaching hours.
                        We were visited for accreditation this past year, and I raised a
                        specific point about full/adjunct faculty ratio with one of the visiting
                        team members, with no reply. I was not asking about this particular
                        issue; at that time, in January, it had not yet surfaced. My point is
                        that our accrediting agency (Southern Association or SACS), seems to be
                        unconcerned about this particular issue, or anything related.
                        Of course. Texas is a 'Right to Work' state, with no unions, but our
                        Faculty Association raised a LOUD outcry -- it affects our own workloads
                        as well as the working climate for our adjuncts. We have many very loyal
                        adjuncts who are now having to figure out their next steps, and we have
                        already lost some. In fact, I am currently trying to fill three part
                        time positions as we speak. Our Faculty Association leadership is
                        working on a position statement this summer, but we shall see what is to
                        become of all this.
                        I can go on about the cheapening of our public education, and the
                        McDonaldization of higher ed, but you have all heard and/or said it all
                        already. I do think, however, that we need to keep the awareness level
                        high. In fact, I am considering a draft to my own local state
                        representative right now, as she is a strong supporter of education in
                        our state. She does have some other issues going on right now, and
                        perhaps some of you may have heard of her due to her recent filibuster
                        in Texas Senate on other issues: Wendy Davis.
                        Tim
                        Timothy L. Sullivan, Ph.D.
                        Professor of Anthropology
                        Richland College
                        12800 Abrams Rd.
                        Dallas, TX 75243

                        972-238-6959
                        mailto:tsullivan%40dcccd.edu
                        >>> "Gilliland, Mary" 06/29/13 3:46 PM >>>
                        I can’t resist this discussion. It is very, very important, and I have
                        appreciated each and every post. It is heart-wrenching, but as
                        anthropologists I know we all see the significance at multiple levels.
                        It affects OUR lives and livlihoods, but it is a deep social issue in
                        our country.

                        I actually have a question rather than a story to share, and that is
                        whether anyone has thought of bringing this to the attention of our
                        various accrediting bodies? The large reliance on adjuncts and other
                        temporary & part-time workers, and now the adjustment of their loads to
                        avoid providing health insurance under new federal laws are both
                        issues/concerns. Because most of the regional accrediting bodies are
                        concerned with shared governance, the fact that this is a top secret
                        matter at least as described by Nikki, but probably elsewhere, might be
                        a matter of concern. I’m thinking the accrediting groups might want to
                        be aware that these sorts of things are going on, as they are likely to
                        be going on in many institutions.

                        I think this may be an opportunity for community colleges, who are
                        seriously underfunded and depend a great deal on temporary workers, to
                        bring the matter to their state and local governments. We are charged
                        with a really important job, we are the institutions that are supposed
                        to be able to provide affordable education to an underserved public, but
                        are we doing so in a way that 1) creates an underclass within our own
                        institutions (the underserved, serving the underserved?), and are we
                        doing so in a way that realistically does help those who are most
                        socioeconomically disadvantaged job? Raising this kind of awareness, though, is going to require
                        rallying administrators, entire institutions, and the public they serve.

                        Mary Kay Gilliland
                        Pima Community College
                        Tucson

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Andrew Petto
                        Thanks to examples from Jo and Mark and many others on the situations with adjuncts on their campuses. All of this (along with many other points) goes to my
                        Message 11 of 13 , Jun 30 9:58 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Thanks to examples from Jo and Mark and many others on the situations
                          with adjuncts on their campuses.

                          All of this (along with many other points) goes to my original post:
                          these are long-term issues in the use (abuse, misuse?) of adjuncts. The
                          complaints about the ACA are a smoke screen to pretend that there is
                          some new exigency out there. As many others have also pointed out, this
                          pattern of under-scheduling adjuncts just below the threshold that
                          generates benefits goes back at least to the 1980s.

                          If a student argued in a paper that some law that was supposed to take
                          effect in 2014 was responsible for a pattern of behavior that began at
                          least 30 years old BEFORE even the conception of that law, we would fail
                          the paper. Why accept this lame excuse from higher ed administrators now?

                          So, yes, ACA may be the proximate issue---it has certain requirements
                          that WILL go into effect in 2014 that did not exist in the past---but it
                          is just another in a series of proximate excuses that serve to hide the
                          basic intent ... get as much work out of as many people at the lowest
                          cost possible. Does your campus lower the tuition or other costs to
                          students commensurate with the lower costs of adjuncts ... or are they
                          charged exactly the same amount as they pay for courses taught by full
                          faculty members?

                          At our university, the adjuncts (known here as 'ad-hoc' instructors) are
                          *supposed* to be used to fill positions that were unforeseen or that
                          arose unexpectedly due to a variety of circumstances that prevented
                          regular faculty and instructional staff from meeting the needs of the
                          students enrolled. And yet, in more than one institution where I have
                          served, the freshman writing courses, for example, have been staff
                          mostly by adjuncts .. even though the university KNOWS that it requires
                          this course of all incoming students AND it gives those students a
                          placement test to know at which levels how many sections need to be
                          taught. It is difficult to imagine that this need is unforeseen and
                          incalculable in the longer term...especially given the strategic plans
                          of the campus on future enrolments and so on.

                          This does not meet the requirements of the 'ad-hoc' appointment by a
                          long stretch. And I am pleased that the faculty union---before it was
                          decertified by the governor---got on the administration to convert those
                          semester-by-semester appointments to "probationary" appointments (which
                          lead to tenure or its equivalent).

                          The argument was, of course, that the result would be that there would
                          be fewer ad-hocs hired. That is true, in one sense: the English dept
                          went from staffing its 1st-year writing courses with 19 ad-hocs to
                          having 8 full-time instructors (with a few ad-hocs each term for the
                          fluctuations in enrolments). But that is only half of the story. Those
                          ad-hocs were able to give up adjunct positions on other campuses, which
                          were now available for those who had been displaced from our campus. So,
                          in sum, we reduced misery and improved conditions for about half of the
                          people affected by this on our campus, and if other campuses followed
                          suit, then these adjuncts would be better across the board.

                          Should we not have done this because other campuses and colleges did not?

                          And, in the end, we got 8 full-time instructors who are able to make a
                          decent living working at one campus for one program in one department.
                          Is that not better for the students? Is that not better for the
                          outcomes? Is that not better for the brand?

                          On another list I have argued that higher ed has been tainted by a
                          business culture that views education as a commodity like automobiles:
                          students pay for the commodity and it is delivered. But a lot of what we
                          do is nothing like delivering a commodity. And those aspects that are
                          not like delivering a commodity are what suffers when the people
                          responsible for adding value to the "product" (i.e., students who will
                          become educated adults) are put into a situation where they are
                          under-resourced and overstressed (for example, the life of any "freeway
                          flyer" who has to stitch together a living by teaching at several
                          different institutions).

                          So, again, because this has been going on for at least 30 years, I am
                          hard pressed to find any good rationale for blaming ACA for the state of
                          affairs. ACA may be the immediate excuse for not treating the adjuncts
                          decently in the coming academic year (and going forward) ... but it
                          cannot account for the fact that the situation has existing for at least
                          30 years (and perhaps has gotten worse in the last 10 years or so).

                          And that is all I have to say about that.

                          Anj



                          On 2013-06-30 00:46, Mark Lewine wrote:
                          >
                          > Jo makes an important point, most of which I agree with...full-time
                          > faculty and their associations in MOST cases have either ignored
                          > part-time or adjunct faculty status and role, as well as anything else
                          > that happens to any other group in the college system. In fact, during
                          > my last twenty years, faculty stopped paying attention to anything but
                          > salaries and benefits for them...allowing a total take-over of what
                          > used to be called by the
                          > AAUP, the “Red Book Principles” on faculty rights and responsibilities
                          > in the academy: curriculum and instruction. College presidents and
                          > Boards subscribed to those principles and called it our
                          > “responsibility” as faculty.
                          >
                          > During the 1960’s and ‘70’s with this academic culture of community
                          > colleges we had a Faculty Senate that was more powerful and respected
                          > by the Board and administration than any union that we had in
                          > subsequent years...context is the key, Jo, and most of it can be
                          > viewed first in California, where it first took hold! The open door
                          > community college mission was respected by most, and the key role of
                          > the faculty as central and as leaders for curricula and instruction
                          > was expected by all...we did not need an AAUP “Red Book” statement of
                          > principles. Our first President, Charles Chapman,
                          >

                          --

                          Andrew J Petto, PhD
                          Senior Lecturer
                          Department of Biological Sciences
                          University of Wisconsin -- Milwaukee
                          PO Box 413
                          Milwaukee WI 53201-0413
                          CapTel Line: 1-877-243-2823
                          Telephone: 414-229-6784
                          FAX: 414-229-3926
                          https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/index.htm

                          Could you be a teacher?
                          <https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/Be_a_teacher.mp3>

                          *************
                          Now Available!!! Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism.
                          https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/ajpetto/www/scc2.htm
                          *************



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Dianne C
                          South Carolina is also a right to work state. (I have been know to use other terms.) Unlike many places, our faculty association has very little say in how
                          Message 12 of 13 , Jul 1, 2013
                          • 0 Attachment
                            South Carolina is also a "right to work state." (I have been know to use other terms.) Unlike many places, our faculty association has very little say in how things go.

                            Our school, too, is limiting adjunct teaching loads. We have been told that we won't cut down on the number of classes offered, therefore, we have uncovered classes because of a lack of adjuncts and those we have are limited. The word going 'round is that full-time faculty will be asked to pick up the slack and that we will either volunteer or be "voluntold" to cover the classes. That would bring our teaching loads back up to 6 per semester and, if we are "voluntold" there were be no renumeration for teaching the added class. (I haven't been told this directly, but many folks think this will happen.) This was also done a couple of years ago when the budget cuts hit SC pretty hard. All full-time faculty in Arts & Sciences taught 6 classes as a normal load for a few semesters, again without compensation.

                            Sigh. The law of unintended consequences strikes again.

                            --Dianne









                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Anthropmor
                            This is exactly the problem, though- the work needs to be done, but the state doesn t think it needs to be paid for. Mike Pavlik ... From: Dianne C
                            Message 13 of 13 , Jul 1, 2013
                            • 0 Attachment
                              This is exactly the problem, though- the work needs to be done, but the state doesn't think it needs to be paid for.
                              Mike Pavlik



                              -----Original Message-----
                              From: Dianne C <dianneky@...>
                              To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com <sacc-l@yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Mon, Jul 1, 2013 1:20 pm
                              Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads





                              South Carolina is also a "right to work state." (I have been know to use other terms.) Unlike many places, our faculty association has very little say in how things go.

                              Our school, too, is limiting adjunct teaching loads. We have been told that we won't cut down on the number of classes offered, therefore, we have uncovered classes because of a lack of adjuncts and those we have are limited. The word going 'round is that full-time faculty will be asked to pick up the slack and that we will either volunteer or be "voluntold" to cover the classes. That would bring our teaching loads back up to 6 per semester and, if we are "voluntold" there were be no renumeration for teaching the added class. (I haven't been told this directly, but many folks think this will happen.) This was also done a couple of years ago when the budget cuts hit SC pretty hard. All full-time faculty in Arts & Sciences taught 6 classes as a normal load for a few semesters, again without compensation.

                              Sigh. The law of unintended consequences strikes again.

                              --Dianne



                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.