| On adding more voices . . .
by Maria Maisto, NFM
President
|
Dear Colleagues,
In this issue of the newsletter, I am happy to share the
introductory message with Tracy Donhardt, who co-edits the
newsletter with Paul Ehrlich. We plan to alternate these
introductory letters so members learn a little more about and from
those who serve on the NFM Board. Please read her letter and other
articles of interest below.
I'd also like to share some thoughts about the recent White House
Community College Summit. In spite of all we did (talking to the
higher ed press; encouraging adjuncts to post and vote at the Summit web site; behind-the-scene
efforts that included contacting the White House -- no response --
and some of the few invited participants whose names were revealed
before the event) to express our concern about the exclusion of
faculty, it was hard not to be disappointed, or cynical, about the
outcome of the October 5 event. The administration's treatment of
adjunct faculty mirrored that of higher education more generally:
we were ignored, dismissed, and our centrality to higher education
completely overlooked. But NFM refuses to succumb to disappointment or cynicism. The
Summit certainly proved that we have our work cut out for us (as if
we didn't know that), but it also showed that when we mobilize, we
CAN be effective. Reading the Summit blog, from the anonymous posts
by those who told incredible stories of the hardships they and
their students are facing, to the bold, strong voices of activists
like Betsy Smith and Robert Yoshioka, I was inspired. It was
exciting to watch the number of votes for posts dealing with
contingent faculty racking up the numbers. And don't think that it
didn't have an effect: as hard as they tried, they could not
completely ignore contingent faculty. The defensive public
statements of administration and other officials in the higher ed
press, and the eleventh-hour summit blog post by a faculty attendee
who declared her intent to represent the interests of "all" faculty
-- indicate that had we been even more organized and vocal,
we might have actually broken through. And we do know that
someone was listening: at the very last breakout session
focusing on "the community college of the future," the need to
"support" adjunct faculty more effectively was, apparently,
discussed, at least enough to merit mention in the report to the
final plenary. While not nearly enough (what we really need is a
summit that focuses exclusively on this issue), it's a start on
which we can build.
Now that the Summit is over, we are trying to contact participants
to try to find out where and how the issue of contingent faculty
was discussed and to remind organizers that any follow-up events
must not repeat the mistake of the original one by continuing to
marginalize adjunct faculty. We intend to communicate with all of
the Summit organizers and participants to let them know that their
responsibility to community colleges is not complete without
attention to contingent faculty. And as for us: NFM's biggest
assets are our determination and our collective voice -- and like
any muscles, the more we exercise them the stronger they will
become. Let's ensure that the "virtual march" on the White House
Community College Summit was just a dry run!
All the best,  |
| Our collective voice will be
heard
by Tracy Donhardt, NFM Board
Member
|
As
Maria mentioned above, as co-editor of the New Faculty Majority
newsletter, I'm happy to get this opportunity to introduce myself
and give you an update on our health insurance initiative at the
same time.
There's
no getting around the fact that health insurance companies move
slowly. In the last newsletter I indicated we were close to having
three or four medical options that members can enroll in and
perhaps several ancillary benefits as well (life, dental, etc.).
We're still close but as you might imagine, finding medical options
for a national health care initiative is complicated (just ask
President Obama). Insurance companies want one thing and we want
another but the negotiations continue and again, let me assure you
we are close.
In
the meantime, let me give you a little background about me and how
I came to NFM, which will also explain why I am helping to lead
this health insurance initiative. First, in a prior life, before I
started teaching part-time at an Indianapolis university, I spent
20 years in corporate Human Resources, specifically, employee
benefits. So that's where my knowledge about insurance, benefits,
and group coverage came from.
After
teaching for five years at Indiana University-Purdue University
Indianapolis (IUPUI) and growing more and more frustrated with my
university's continued exploitation of its adjuncts, on the advice
and with the blessing of the Director of the Writing Program for
which I taught, I formed a Coalition of part-time faculty and we
began raising awareness of the exploitive conditions under which we
worked. This was the fall of 2009 and the group started small,
literally a handful of adjuncts in the English department who
thought the 54 composition adjuncts of writing in the 115-person
department should be included in our School's online faculty and
staff directory. We had the same records as full-time faculty and
staff; our records were simply deliberately omitted from the
directory. The reason given for this slight? There were too many of
us to manage the administrative task of keeping the directory
updated from one semester to the next. Right. Those same
administrators who were refusing to let us in the directory because
there were too many of us to manage the workload were the ones who
hired us all and created the workload. (This would be the same
reason the university does not keep track of our education
credentials.)
But
we didn't give up; in fact, one of our mantras is "patience,
persistence, and professionalism," because that was the mode of
conduct we adopted then and is one we have not lost sight of to
this day.
Of
course we wanted more than to be listed in the directory (which we
ultimately obtained). We wanted higher pay, benefits, access to
professional development, inclusion in faculty governance, and
respect, to name the ones most of you are likely also seeking. So
our little group grew and became louder and bolder. We expanded
beyond the walls of the English department and into the halls of
the School of Liberal Arts. We recruited a board member from World
Languages and liaisons from other areas of Liberal Arts. We held a
week-long Teach-in to educate full-time faculty and students about
adjunct issues. We created a documentary called Part-time Faculty. Full-time Impact. playing
on the university's advertising campaign slogan, "Where Impact Is
Made." But our greatest achievement was getting our own health
insurance plan (because I knew how to do that from my years in HR)
for adjuncts in Liberal Arts, for which we needed no IUPUI funds
nor resources. We did ask for their help in identifying others who
could benefit from this though because what was good for part-time
faculty in Liberal Arts would be good for all part-time employees
on campus, right?. That's when our greatest achievement became our
greatest frustration and disappointment. We were informed by
university administration that we were violating university policy
by getting our own group health insurance plan. We were shot down.
We were forced to halt that initiative or perhaps risk being
fired.
But
life is funny, right? Our greatest frustration and disappointment
of that first year became our greatest awareness-raising
opportunity. We informed the media about the university's blatant
unwillingness to open dialogue and find a creative solution to the
problem its administrators created in hiring more than 1,000
adjunct faculty and an unknown number of part-time
staff.
The
media can be a powerful ally. Within a week, we were blogged about
in a local alternative paper and written about in Inside Higher Ed.
Less than a week later, the local business journal also
ran a full story about our plight, reaching an entirely new
audience. And a month later, the local alternative paper followed
up with a full profile about
us and our issues, also connecting us to the national story. Links
to those stories were passed around and other bloggers blogged
about us. Who could believe that a university would shut down its
faculty's attempt to obtain their own health insurance, especially
when these faculty were excluded from the university's benefits
plans?
That's
when NFM entered the picture, asking me to join the board and try
to get insurance for members as I did for adjuncts at my
university. And here we are.
Since
the media attention last year, my group has continued to grow and
get louder. We're now a campus-wide group working to improve the
conditions and the culture for all part-time faculty. Indiana has
no bargaining laws on the books so we're moving along a non-union
path. Luckily for us, we receive help and advice from adjunct
organizers like Joe Berry and our state and local (campus) AAUP
chapters. We also have a strong voice of a tenured faculty member
as our advisor and liaison who comes to our meetings and our
demonstrations; when he shoots down administrators' excuse of "no
money," he's much more credible than when we attempt the same
rebuttal. And we became the first chapter of NFM.
Our
main initiative this year is growing our membership base. We were
told by administrators we need to "prove" we represent part-time
faculty across campus and aren't just a handful of complainers, and
so we've begun a major membership drive and are gaining members
from other Schools on campus - science, art, education, and
others - every week. Staff and students are joining in solidarity;
one student has volunteered to form a student delegation. And yes,
full-time and tenured faculty also are joining. Ultimately, this is
about equity for all faculty.
In
addition, we've held two "quiet demonstrations" during the
university President and campus Chancellor's annual speeches during
which we held signs to remind them of the large population of
adjuncts on their campus. We submitted an endorsement we received
from the AAUP for a pay increase for adjuncts to the administration
and all deans on campus. That brought a bit more media attention.
Most
recently, we were invited by the university's faculty governance
body to present our issues. With that, we gave them several tasks:
form a task force to uncover and understand the adjunct situation
on our campus; draft policies or recommendations to address the
issues adjuncts are facing; and create an office dedicated to
protecting and advancing part-time faculty at IUPUI. The ball is in
their court. But clearly, our voice, still getting louder, is being
heard.
In
this newsletter are other stories and references to rising adjunct
voices and the increase in adjunct activism on campuses. Add your
voice and send us your own stories so we can run more stories in
this newsletter.
Tracy Donhardt, co-editor
|
| Noteworthy
adjunct activism is recognized |
This fall NFM
Board member Steve Street received an award for courageous service
from his union, United University Professions, for which he is the
elected representative for part-time concerns on his State
University of New York campus.
 |
| Steve Street accepts award
for courageous adjunct activism |
In this photo,
Steve is on the right; UUP President Phil Smith is at the center;
and Fayez Samuel, for whom the award is named, is on the left;
Samuel was an adjunct professor at SUNY-Farmington and an early
advocate for contingent faculty.
After the ceremony
pictured here, Steve returned to his local chapter to continue the
inside/outside strategy, i.e. advocating for contingents in a union
dominated by non-contingent faculty. At the very next
labor/management meeting, he was silenced by his chapter president
and told by another member of the chapter's Executive Board that
hearing about part-time issues "gets old. Maybe you should find
another forum." Still, he'll go to the next meeting and do his best
to represent his constituency. That's the inside/outside strategy
at work.
Steve
continues to speak up in such national publications as
Academe, the Chronicle of Higher Education,
Inside Higher Ed, and Thought & Action. NFM
is proud that Steve has recently taken a leadership position on its
Board of Directors.
|
With apologies to Janis
Joplin, below is the second installment of what will be a regular
newsletter feature: a place for you, our members, to share your
stories, if not your blues, about your process of filing for
Unemployment Compensation.
Whether or not you've been
successful, the particulars of your situation in your particular
state are invaluable to NFM members and adcons across the
country who are or might soon be in similar situations, pursuing
similar processes in filings of their own. As most of us already
know from serving institutions without really being considered a
part of those institutions, one of the benefits we often have to do
without for a long time is the knowledge that we're not
alone.
These stories
are meant to convince you otherwise: far from having "nothing left
to lose," as Janis sang it, we have everything to gain and many
ways of gaining it.
Thanks to
Jessica Burke for being our latest UC storyteller. Her story, which
highlights the challenges faced by adjuncts who file for
unemployment benefits and follows Steve Street's story in the last
newsletter, reaffirms NFM's need to step up our efforts with our
National Unemployment Initiative in challenging schools and the
laws.
|
|
Surviving
an Unemployment Hearing
By
Jessica Burke, Adjunct Lecturer, Dept of English
The
College of Staten Island
|
Claiming
unemployment between semesters takes gumption and guts. So if you
don't want a hassle or don't feel up to challenging the system, I'd
say don't do it. But, for everyone else, here's my
story.
I
was scared. I
had no income for the summer and, after working a temporary job
that had expired, my husband's unemployment insurance was
suspended. If we didn't have helpful relatives and a somewhat
understanding landlord, we would have been out of a home. Because
of our earnings for the prior year, we were ineligible for public
assistance. If we hadn't had the foresight to pay for a share in a
local community shared agriculture, we wouldn't have had food for
the summer. I borrowed rent money and wrote letters to creditors
and my utilities.
Heeding
the call of New Faculty Majority, I filed for unemployment,
thinking I had nothing to lose. But an investigation
into "reasonable assurance" was begun and my claim was halted. I
requested an appeal hearing. I telephoned my union but got no
response. I emailed, again no response. I sent an irate letter to
my union chapter, of which I am a member, and was eventually
pointed to the Worker's Defense League. All this took two
months.
During the same time, I reached out to NFM
for advice and within hours, I was contacted by about half-a-dozen
folks and spoke to some via phone, despite the fact that they were
off to a conference. I received support and advice on how to
proceed, but above all, I got information. Meanwhile, I looked for
work and was lucky to find a couple independent jobs (not even
turning away from babysitting gigs, just to pay the electric
bills). I decided I couldn't afford to take my GRE, much less the
admission fees for a doctoral program. Besides that, how could I in all good
conscience move ahead in a career that treats its employees like
this?
I went
to my hearing where I learned the CUNY representative wasn't there
because she was on vacation but had demanded a denial of benefits
on the grounds that the 'reasonable assurance' rule applied to
adjuncts. Luckily
the judge refused the rep's demands. Still, I was unprepared for
the information the judge wanted, like the times I was on
campus, details about each class, how much I earned each term, and
more. I discovered my university had underreported my
earnings. Due to
a mailing mixup by the Appeals Board that gave me some leverage
power, my next hearing date was moved up. I
prepped as much as I could by reading "Access to Unemployment
Insurance Benefits for Contingent Faculty," by Joe Berry, Beverly
Stewart, and Helena Worthen. I corresponded with my new brethren at
NFM.
I
spoke with someone at the Workers Defense League, an arrogant,
brusque man, who refused to represent me because he felt that
despite the fact that I earned more last year than I am currently
earning this year, I had no case.
I
turned back to NFM for some sound and supportive advice. I was told
I was being intimidated. I spoke with my union chapter fellows, who
pledged further support. I resolved to stand firm knowing I was
supported by my fellows at NFM and my union chapter. I also spoke
with a union rep, who meant well, but had no further advice other
than to tell me to tell the truth and to apply for food
stamps.
I went
to the appeal hearing early to view my file. I was met with yet
another demand by the CUNY rep to adjourn my hearing because
neither she nor my department chair were able to
attend. The
judge waited nearly 30 minutes for the CUNY rep, but when she
didn't, continued the hearing. We talked about the discrepancies in
my reported earnings, which she still seemed confused
about. I was
reminded of something in Joe Berry's handbook that often times the
administrative law judge is just a glorified secretary who may feel
intimidated by the so-called academic elite (read adjunct). I
decided to play it humble and simply stated what my earnings had
been reported and gave her the most recent statement of earnings
sent to me by the Department of Labor, which she did not have. She
entered my pay information into the record. The hearing was
adjourned and she said I'd receive her ruling within a
week.
I
received a very confusing ruling three days later. It was in legal
lingo. After reading it four times and with the help of my husband,
we decided the letter meant she disagreed with the initial decision
of denial. I went to the computer, logged into unemployment and saw
that a rather large payment had been released. My fortitude had
paid off. I won. No thanks to the Workers Defense League. Small
thanks to my union, save for my union chapter brethren. Large
thanks to NFM.
My
advice through all this: do NOT allow the judge to get a rise out
of you. Don't go in to court thinking you're an educated person and
up against a glorified administrator. Be as humble as you can.
Answer truthfully and don't take no for an answer. If your union
won't help you, find someone who can offer advice (talk to the
folks at NFM). Read Joe Berry's handbook and bring your paystubs
and every other shred of paperwork you receive from your school
regarding your employment and from the Department of Labor
regarding your claim. Get to the hearing early and READ everything
in your file. Take notes.
Postscript:
I'm
a new adjunct, having started at CUNY in Fall 2008. I started at
the usual one course for new adjuncts, but was up to three a year
later. I
had good reviews. I was liked by my students. I had a reasonably
high rate of remedial students passing their exams. I earned much
needed health insurance by the spring of 2010, for myself only
since it's too expensive to cover my husband. I applied for summer
work and thought I had a good chance at since I'd taught the summer
before. But,
I wasn't given a summer class to teach and heard the department was
having difficulty filling fall courses.
I
received a notice that my unemployment decision is being
appealed by the Commissioner of Labor. The appeal was filed on 10/6
but they didn't notify me until 20 days after. It has no
instructions for me. No court date to reappear.
Nothing.
Read
a longer, more complete version of Jessica's story at the UCI web site.
|
|
Gaining
Support -- And Benefits at a UI Filing Party
By Peter
D.G. Brown
|
The
State University of New York is anything but small. With 465,000
students and 88,000 faculty members on 64 campuses across the
state, SUNY is the largest university system in the world.
All full-time and part-time faculty employed at SUNY's 29
comprehensive and specialized colleges, graduate schools, and
health centers are represented by one comprehensive union, United
University Professions. With some 35,000 members, UUP is the
largest higher education union in America.
The
New Paltz UUP chapter's Part-Time Concerns Committee organized an
Unemployment Insurance (UI) party in May. About a dozen part-timers
showed up, were treated to pizza, and discussed the ins and outs of
applying for UI with NFM-member Yvonne Aspengren, the UUP chapter's
Vice President for Part-Timers, and me. The group decided to form a
common-interest e-mail group and share their experiences as they
moved into the summer. Some were applying for UI for the first
time, while others had regularly been receiving benefits during
teaching breaks for years. About half of the group received
benefits without a hitch, while others needed to appeal an initial
negative verdict before being awarded UI payments. The last person
to win an appeal was notified in October, with benefits being
awarded retroactively to May.
The
New Paltz chapter plans to organize a similar group next May. We
hope that more adjuncts will join and benefit from the experience
gained from this year's group. Some adjuncts lack the knowledge
needed to apply for unemployment benefits. Others fear they might
be vulnerable to retaliation from their employer. We therefore
asked UUP headquarters to explore the possibility of providing us
with more informational support. On October 5, UUP President Phil
Smith attended a meeting of the New Paltz chapter's departmental
representatives and assured us that he is exploring how NYSUT or
AFL-CIO can assist our adjuncts as they negotiate the UI
maze. Below
are excerpts from individuals who formed this year's support group
e-mail list:
"I
followed your advice and I'm into my third week of receiving
unemployment benefits. It's only about $100 a week in my case, but
it helps. They told me that I have to go online 1x a week for
unemployment re-certification in order to get the week's $. It only
takes a few minutes. I've been in receipt of unemployment benefits
since the first week of June."
"If
I am approved, I will get $152 per week."
"I
am one of those "permanent adjuncts" (and have been for 10+ years);
I have a history of always getting 2-3 classes per semester (and am
always on the website listed with such), However, right before each
semester there is a flurry of great uncertainty as the final class
counts are calculated and tenured Professors are then first taken
care of... These are all issues of contingent job security and I
therefore have applied for UI and I expect to get it..."
"I
have been at SUNY for 10 years and every semester it's the same.
It's very stressful worrying every semester if I might lose my
benefits. Also, we are so poorly paid for what we do, I feel I
deserve the unemployment compensation, even if it is small."
"Thank you all for sharing your experience. I was denied, but kept
claiming. I sent an appeal and in my letter used some of the
language that I borrowed from this email list, like
'non-enforceable contract' and I just noticed that I received my
first UI payment. I thought an appeal would be harder than that
but as far as I can tell, I was approved. Don't be discouraged,
appeal!"
Basic
information on how to file in New York can be obtained from the NYS
Department of Labor website; other states have their own websites,
and the process differs widely from state to state. You
should file your claim in the first week you become totally or
partially unemployed. It is important to file timely because your
first week is unpaid, commonly referred to as the "waiting period".
Any delay may cost you benefits.
|
Non-tenure-track
Researchers in Science and Technology, Part
II: Competition for Employment, Working Conditions, and Career
Progression
By
Paul Ehrlich
|
|
In
the last newsletter, I discussed non-tenure-track researchers. In
this second article, additional aspects of their employment will be
described, including the major cause of their problems, current
working conditions, and likely career paths.
Competition
for Employment: Oversupply of Scientists.
Scientists with doctoral degrees face fierce competition on a
global scale for non-tenure-track positions. Despite overwhelming
evidence that there is an oversupply of scientists in the United
States, panels of distinguished scientists and prominent industry
representatives have routinely issued reports that predict the
demise of research and development due to a shortage of trained
workers. These documents include: "The Path Forward" (2010);
"Rising Above the Gathering Storm" (2007); and "Tapping America's
Potential" (2005). Demographers, labor statisticians, and other
academics who study labor markets come to the opposite conclusion
with evidence provided in, for example, journal articles and
Congressional testimony. One key statistic sums up the situation:
"The overall STEM [science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics] workforce totals about 4.8 million, which is less than
a third of the 15.7 million workers who hold at least one STEM
degree." [testimony before a Congressional subcommittee by H.
Salzman in 2007].
Working Conditions.
Non-tenure-track researchers have positions that typically differ
little from that of post-docs with two years of experience, i.e.,
the mentor chooses the research topic, provides detailed guidance
on carrying out the project, decides when and where to publish
results, and usually presents the research at conferences and
departmental seminars. While relationships with mentors and other
senior faculty are of course quite varied, many adjunct researchers
face small, or sometimes intense, indignities on a daily basis.
Problems range from little consideration for their ideas and
assignment of all credit to "the [mentor's name] lab" to excessive
workloads (characterized, for example, by routine phone calls in
the middle of the night) to personally degrading but
non-work-related actions by laboratory directors, such as (in at
least one lab) frequently and openly taking sandwiches from lunch
bags stored in a hallway (it is illegal to store food in a
laboratory desk).
Medium
and Long-Term Outcomes for Post-docs. Due to
the great excess of applicants for tenure-track positions, many
scientists now go on to their second, third, or fourth
post-doctoral position or to essentially equivalent
non-tenure-track academic positions. Titles for the latter vary by
institution-some use typical adjunct titles such as lecturer or
adjunct assistant professor, but other titles such as assistant
research professor, postdoctoral associate, and research associate
are also frequently used. Tenured faculty usually consider
scientists who have spent more than four or five years in a
post-doctoral or related position to be employed in the research
equivalent of adjunct teaching positions.
Scientists
who are doing well as non-tenure-track researchers can often keep
their position for a decade or more, but in the past have typically
moved to industry or government jobs. Economic conditions and the
increasing oversupply of trained doctoral-level scientists are
making these transfers less likely. [This conclusion is consistent
with the experience of many scientists but statistics are not
available.] A small percentage of non-tenure-track scientists,
i.e., one or two positions for each senior faculty member with more
than one research grant, are appointed to a university staff
position that is theoretically permanent. In addition to research
these positions typically entail supervision of a "core" facility,
such as a laboratory that provides blood tests that are not
commercially available (usually for clinical trials) or a computer
laboratory. Even the lucky few with a university staff position are
still likely to end up looking for a job in late middle age, a
tough time for researchers to find new employment. This is simply a
result of an emphasis on serving the research program, as well as
relying on the goodwill and political support, of one
senior, tenured faculty member who is typically twenty years
older.
Summary.
Most
scientists with doctoral degrees face a dismal future due to the
poor treatment of non-tenure-track researchers and an inadequate
number of alternative positions in industry. Very poor working
conditions, minimal intellectual input into research projects, and
negligible credit for their work in the scientific community are
the norm for non-tenure-track researchers. Thus, non-tenure-track
research faculty will benefit from NFM efforts to achieve equity in
academic freedom, faculty governance, and professional advancement
(as well as improved job security as outlined in the previous
newsletter). And just as they can benefit from NFM,
non-tenure-track researchers have the potential to increase NFM
membership and broaden the scope of its effect on universities
thereby helping NFM to achieve its goals.
|
|
Filing a Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) Request
By Matt Williams, NFM Vice
President
|
|
For the adjunct activist,
information can be quite powerful. Information about how your
institution allocates government funding, for instance, may be
quite compelling to a state legislator whom you are attempting to
persuade to take a particular position on some piece of legislation
that will benefit adjunct and contingent faculty. But how can you
obtain this information?
Most of us are familiar
with the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). FOIA is
intended to provide greater transparency in government, but there
is a catch: it only applies to organs of the U.S. federal
government. According to the U.S. Department of Justice
website, "The
FOIA applies only to federal agencies and does not create a right
of access to records held by Congress, the courts, or by state or
local government agencies. Each state has its own public access
laws that should be consulted for access to state and local
records."
The records of state
universities are generally not covered under the federal Freedom of
Information Act. Most states, however, do have provisions in law to
permit citizens and organizations to request--even
anonymously--information that is maintained by the state
government. There are some limitations on this information, but
most states permit extensive access to documents that can help you
to establish your argument, make your case, and shed light on the
inner workings of state universities. Links to a summary of these
laws for every state and Washington, D.C. can be found in the "Open Government Guide" on The
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press website. This guide is an
invaluable tool for learning about the open government laws in your
state.
I have had considerable
success locating and subsequently publicizing information that my
former employer, The University of Akron, would probably rather not
have publicized. On one occasion I requested the salaries of all
employees on campus. I then analyzed this data to arrive at the
following shocking conclusions:
- Only
2.5% of The University of Akron's $400 million budget is spent
compensating its 1,000+ part-time employees.
- The
mean salary for part-time faculty at UA is $800 per credit hour, or
$16,800 per year at the maximum permitted teaching load.
-
UA's President
Proenza and his 35 vice presidents earn in excess of half of what
the 1,000 part-time faculty earn as a group.
Since discovering this
information I have become accustomed to repeating these statistics
over and over again. Given the frequent abuses of adjunct and
contingent faculty in higher education, you will likely find
similar inequities at your state institution. The biggest challenge
for adjunct activists is to sell the problem to those who are
unaware that such a problem exists. Bringing these facts to light
can help you to successfully make your arguments.
|
|
Unemployment Insurance
Compensation During Winter Recess: If your contract ends at
the end of the fall semester and you don't have a binding contract
or letter of reappointment for the spring semester, you may be
eligible for UI benefits. If you're not sure if you are eligible,
check with your union or on the website of the National Unemployment Compensation
Initiative of the NFM (especially links on the
tab labeled "Just the Facts").
A description of the
unemployment insurance application process for each state also is
available (click on the tab labeled "Apply for Unemployment"). NFM
may be able to provide additional assistance. Click here for contact
information.
Post Your Comments on
the New Faculty Majority Blog and Facebook: The NFM blog and Facebook page, developed and
managed by Vanessa Vaile, support the NFM mission and promote an
open exchange of ideas and information about higher education and
professional issues, especially concerning adjunct and contingent
faculty. Your comments are welcome.
Got regional news you'd
like to share?
Is
there a local adjunct rally going on in your area? An education
forum? An anniversary of your group's organizing efforts? Send us
your calendar events or other regional news and we'll run them in
the next newsletter (events generally must be two months out as the
newsletter is published every other month, although we can
acknowledge past events in celebration). |
It's
Not Easy to Ask for Money, But ...
|
In the last couple newsletters, we've been informing members
that NFM's board of directors voted to solicit annual dues of $15
as a minimum suggested contribution.
We at NFM are all volunteers, relying on one another. While it
remains far more important for us to gather members than
dues, every organization needs sources of funding - even to do work
that is rewarding in itself.
Dues are payable online at New Faculty Majority or by check to
New Faculty Majority
1700 West Market Street #159
Akron, OH 44313-7002
Those who join receive a free bumper sticker. To buy a bumper
sticker, send $2.00 to the address above. Buy one for yourself and
one for a colleague!
|
|
|
|
|
Inside this
issue:
- Noteworthy
adjunct activism
- Me and UC:
members' stories on filing for unemployment
- Gaining
support and benefits at UI filing party
- Part II:
Non-tenure track researchers
- How to file a
Freedom of Information Act request
-
Announcements
|
NFM UCI
Site
 |
|
NFM
Blog |
 |
 |
 |
 |
NFM
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Ross Borden
Peter D.G. Brown
Tracy Donhardt
Paul Ehrlich
Eric Hultquist
William Lipkin (Treasurer)
Jack Longmate
Maria Maisto (President)
Sherryll Mleynek
Susan Raftery
Robert Samuels
Steve Street
Alan Trevithick
Rebecca Trussell
Vanessa Crary Vaile
Anne Wiegard (Secretary)
Matt Williams (Vice President)
Earl Yarrington
NFM BOARD OF
ADVISORS
Joe Berry
Marc Bousquet
Gwendolyn Bradley
Frank Cosco
Pablo Eisenberg
Judith Gappa
Elizabeth Hoffman
Deborah Louis
Richard Moser
Eileen E. Schell
Sandra Schroeder
OUR MISSION STATEMENT
NFM
is dedicated to improving the quality of American higher education
by advancing professional equity and securing academic freedom for
all adjunct and contingent educators. For this purpose, NFM engages
in education and advocacy to provide economic justice and academic
equity for all college teachers. NFM is committed to creating
stable, equitable, sustainable, non-exploitative academic
environments that promote more effective teaching and
learning.
|
Help in the
collection of data!
The Coalition on the Academic Workforce survey of Contingent Faculty is
accepting responses on its
survey about working conditions of contingent faculty -
salaries, benefits, assignments, etc.
The
survey, which closes Nov. 30, can be found here.
Add your voice to the collective
one!
|
Your
input is needed!
At
the COCAL conference in August this year, NFM Board members Jack
Longmate and Frank Cosco introduced the draft of a groundbreaking
practical, long-term action plan based on exemplary -- and more
importantly, existing -- conditions at Vancouver Community
College.
We
strongly encourage all NFM members to read and comment on this draft in
preparation for a 2011 membership vote on whether NFM should
officially adopt it
|
|
|
