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

Re: [SACC-L] Re: Affordable Care Act and Adjunct Courseloads

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 13 , Jun 28, 2013
    • 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 2 of 13 , Jun 29, 2013
      • 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 3 of 13 , Jun 29, 2013
        • 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 4 of 13 , Jun 29, 2013
          • 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 5 of 13 , Jun 29, 2013
            • 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 6 of 13 , Jun 29, 2013
              • 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 7 of 13 , Jun 29, 2013
                • 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 8 of 13 , Jun 29, 2013
                  • 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 9 of 13 , Jun 30, 2013
                    • 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 10 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 11 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.