|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monday, November 10, 2025
THURSDAY: "The New Mayor of New York City" on Zoom (CUNY School of Labor and Urban Studies)
Friday, September 26, 2025
The Grand Irony of Nursing Education and Burnout in U.S. Health Care
Nursing has long been romanticized as both a “calling” and a profession—an occupation where devotion to patients is assumed to be limitless. Nursing schools, hospitals, and media narratives often reinforce this ideal, framing the nurse as a tireless caregiver who sacrifices for the greater good. But behind the cultural image is a system that normalizes exhaustion, accepts overwork, and relies on the quiet suffering of an increasingly strained workforce.
The cultural expectation that nurses should sacrifice their own well-being has deep historical roots. Florence Nightingale’s legacy in the mid-19th century portrayed nursing as a noble vocation, tied as much to moral virtue as to medical skill. During World War I and World War II, nurses were celebrated as patriotic servants, enduring brutal conditions without complaint. By the late 20th century, popular culture reinforced the idea of the nurse as both saintly and stoic—expected to carry on through fatigue, trauma, and loss. This framing has carried into the 21st century. During the COVID-19 pandemic, nurses were lauded as “heroes” in speeches, advertisements, and nightly news coverage. But the rhetoric of heroism masked a harsher reality: nurses were sent into hospitals without adequate protective equipment, with overwhelming patient loads, and with little institutional support. The language of devotion was used as a shield against criticism, even as nurses themselves broke down from exhaustion.
The problem begins in nursing education. Students are taught the technical skills of patient care, but they are also socialized into a culture that emphasizes resilience, self-sacrifice, and “doing whatever it takes.” Clinical rotations often expose nursing students to chronic understaffing and unsafe patient loads, but instead of treating this as structural failure, students are told it is simply “the reality of nursing.” In effect, they are trained to adapt to dysfunction rather than challenge it.
Once in the workforce, the pressures intensify. Hospitals and clinics operate under tight staffing budgets, pushing nurses to manage far more patients than recommended. Shifts stretch from 12 to 16 hours, and mandatory overtime is not uncommon. Documentation demands, electronic medical record systems, and administrative oversight add layers of clerical work that take time away from direct patient care. The emotional toll of constantly navigating life-and-death decisions, combined with lack of rest, creates a perfect storm of burnout. The grand irony is that the profession celebrates devotion while neglecting the well-being of the devoted. Nurses are praised as “heroes” during crises, but when they ask for better staffing ratios, safer conditions, or mental health support, they are often dismissed as “not team players.” In non-unionized hospitals, the risks are magnified: nurses have little leverage to negotiate schedules, resist unsafe assignments, or push back against retaliation. Instead, they are expected to remain loyal, even as stress erodes their health and shortens their careers.
Recent years have shown that nurses are increasingly unwilling to accept this reality. In Oregon in 2025, nearly 5,000 unionized nurses, physicians, and midwives staged the largest health care worker strike in the state’s history, demanding higher wages, better staffing levels, and workload adjustments that reflect patient severity rather than just patient numbers. After six weeks, they secured a contract with substantial pay raises, penalty pay for missed breaks, and staffing reforms. In New Orleans, nurses at University Medical Center have launched repeated strikes as negotiations stall, citing unsafe staffing that puts both their health and their patients at risk. These actions are not isolated. In 2022, approximately 15,000 Minnesota nurses launched the largest private-sector nurses’ strike in U.S. history, and since 2020 the number of nurse strikes nationwide has more than tripled.
Alongside strikes, nurses are pushing for legislative solutions. At the federal level, the Nurse Staffing Standards for Hospital Patient Safety and Quality Care Act has been introduced, which would mandate minimum nurse-to-patient ratios and provide whistleblower protections. In New York, the Safe Staffing for Hospital Care Act seeks to set legally enforceable staffing levels and ban most mandatory overtime. Even California, long considered a leader in nurse staffing ratios, has faced crises in psychiatric hospitals so severe that Governor Gavin Newsom introduced emergency rules to address chronic understaffing linked to patient harm. Enforcement remains uneven, however. At Albany Medical Center in New York, chronic understaffing violations led to hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines, a reminder that without strong oversight, even well-crafted laws can be ignored.
The United States’ piecemeal and adversarial approach contrasts sharply with other countries. In Canada, provinces like British Columbia have legislated nurse-to-patient ratios similar to those in California, and in Quebec, unions won agreements that legally cap workloads for certain units. In the United Kingdom, the National Health Service has long recognized safe staffing as a matter of public accountability, and while austerity policies have strained the system, England, Wales, and Scotland all employ government-set nurse-to-patient standards to protect both patients and staff. Nordic countries go further, with Sweden and Norway integrating nurse well-being into health policy; short shifts, strong union protections, and publicly funded healthcare systems reduce the risk of burnout by design. While no system is perfect, these models show that burnout is not inevitable—it is a political and policy choice.
Union presence consistently makes a difference. Studies show that unionized nurses are more successful at securing safe staffing ratios, resisting exploitative scheduling, and advocating for patient safety. But unionization rates in nursing remain uneven, and in many states nurses are discouraged or even legally restricted from organizing. Without collective power, individual nurses are forced to rely on personal endurance, which is precisely what the system counts on.
The outcome is devastating not only for nurses but for patients. Burnout leads to higher turnover, staffing shortages, and medical errors—all while nursing schools continue to churn out new graduates to replace those driven from the profession. It is a cycle sustained by institutional denial and the myth of infinite devotion.
If U.S. higher education is serious about preparing nurses for the future, nursing programs must move beyond the rhetoric of sacrifice. They need to teach students not only how to care for patients but also how to advocate for themselves and their colleagues. They need to expose the structural causes of burnout and prepare nurses to demand better conditions, not simply endure them. Until then, the irony remains: a profession that celebrates care while sacrificing its caregivers.
Sources
-
American Nurses Association (ANA). “Workplace Stress & Burnout.” ANA Enterprise, 2023.
-
National Nurses United. Nursing Staffing Crisis in the United States, 2022.
-
Bae, S. “Nurse Staffing and Patient Outcomes: A Literature Review.” Nursing Outlook, Vol. 64, No. 3 (2016): 322-333.
-
Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Union Members Summary.” U.S. Department of Labor, 2024.
-
Shah, M.K., Gandrakota, N., Cimiotti, J.P., Ghose, N., Moore, M., Ali, M.K. “Prevalence of and Factors Associated With Nurse Burnout in the US.” JAMA Network Open, Vol. 4, No. 2 (2021): e2036469.
-
Nelson, Sioban. Say Little, Do Much: Nursing, Nuns, and Hospitals in the Nineteenth Century. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001.
-
Kalisch, Philip A. & Kalisch, Beatrice J. The Advance of American Nursing. Little, Brown, 1986.
-
Oregon Capital Chronicle, “Governor Kotek Criticizes Providence Over Largest Strike of Health Care Workers in State History,” January 2025.
-
Associated Press, “Oregon Health Care Strike Ends After Six Weeks,” February 2025.
-
National Nurses United, “New Orleans Nurses Deliver Notice for Third Strike at UMC,” 2025.
-
NurseTogether, “Nurse Strikes: An Increasing Trend in the U.S.,” 2024.
-
New York State Senate Bill S4003, “Safe Staffing for Hospital Care Act,” 2025.
-
San Francisco Chronicle, “Newsom Imposes Emergency Staffing Rules at State Psychiatric Hospitals,” 2025.
-
Times Union, “Editorial: Hospital’s Staffing Violations Show Need for Enforcement,” 2025.
-
Oulton, J.A. “The Global Nursing Shortage: An Overview of Issues and Actions.” Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, Vol. 7, No. 3 (2006): 34S–39S.
-
Rafferty, Anne Marie et al. “Outcomes of Variation in Hospital Nurse Staffing in English Hospitals.” BMJ Quality & Safety, 2007.
-
Aiken, Linda H. et al. “Nurse Staffing and Education and Hospital Mortality in Nine European Countries.” The Lancet, Vol. 383, No. 9931 (2014): 1824–1830.
Friday, September 5, 2025
The Veritas Evasion: How Elite University Presidents Dodge Structural Critique
Across American higher education, labor rights have been under sustained pressure for decades. Adjunct faculty and contingent academic workers face precarious employment conditions, stagnant pay, and eroding protections. Yet when systemic critiques are raised, elite university presidents often reframe the discussion, narrowing structural problems into manageable, apolitical talking points.
Technocratic Deflection
Presidents frequently recast labor issues in neutral managerial terms:
-
Union suppression = “workforce modernization”
-
Adjunct exploitation = “budgetary flexibility”
-
Student debt peonage = “innovative financing”
By reducing structural injustices to administrative concerns, they strip these issues of political and historical significance, making them easier to manage and harder to challenge.
The “Hands Tied” Defense
When confronted with inequities, presidents often insist:
-
“Declining appropriations leave us no choice.”
-
“Our boards demand fiscal responsibility.”
-
“Market forces shape our decisions.”
This logic frames systemic oppression as inevitable, technical, and apolitical — a narrative that protects institutional power while masking the long-term consequences for faculty and students.
Vocabulary Capture
Elite leaders control the conversation through language:
-
Critics say “union suppression”; presidents say “workforce modernization.”
-
Activists say “racial exclusion”; presidents invoke “mission fit.”
-
Students call it “robocolleges” or corporatization; presidents speak of “scaling access.”
By changing the words, they change the battlefield, making systemic critique appear radical, ill-informed, or irrelevant.
Evasion of History
Historical context is often sidelined:
-
Universities rarely acknowledge their role in breaking faculty strikes or adopting corporate governance models.
-
They deflect from the impact of elite endowments and funding structures in deepening inequality.
-
Decisions that shape labor, access, and academic priorities are rarely recognized as part of a decades-long neoliberal project.
Case Studies
1. Columbia University's $221 Million Settlement
In a notable instance, Columbia University agreed to a $221 million settlement with the Trump administration, restoring previously cut federal research funding. While the university emphasized its continued autonomy in admissions and hiring decisions, the settlement included oversight on issues such as merit-based hiring and campus free speech. This move sparked backlash from faculty who viewed it as political interference in academic governance .
2. Harvard University's Response to Federal Pressure
Harvard University faced scrutiny from the Trump administration over alleged failure to combat antisemitism. In response, Harvard President Alan Garber pledged cooperation with federal demands but faced criticism for lacking a strong defense of academic independence. Administrative actions, including suspensions of pro-Palestinian programs, heightened faculty unease and raised concerns about potential political interference in academic institutions .
3. The 2023 Rutgers University Strike
At Rutgers University, faculty and graduate student workers participated in a strike demanding increased salaries, job security, and equal pay for equal work. The strike, involving over 9,000 staff members and 67,000 students, was suspended after a tentative agreement for across-the-board salary increases was reached. This action highlighted the growing mobilization of contingent faculty and the challenges they face in advocating for better working conditions .
The Veritas Problem
Elite institutions claim Veritas — truth — but their leaders practice selective blindness. They respond to criticism in managerial jargon, policing language, and rendering systemic injustices invisible within the institution.
Across campuses nationwide, the strategy is consistent: narrow the conversation, maintain the appearance of neutrality, and protect the interests of trustees, donors, and corporate partners — all while structural crises of labor, debt, and inequality continue unchecked.
Sources:
-
"Columbia agrees $221mn settlement with Trump administration" – Financial Times, August 2025
-
"Harvard faculty organize amid anxiety university will capitulate to Trump" – The Guardian, April 2025
-
"2023 Rutgers University strike" – Wikipedia, June 2023
Thursday, September 4, 2025
The University of California Meltdown: Trump’s Extortion Meets Years of Student Suppression
University of California (UC) President James Milliken has sounded an alarm over what he calls one of the “gravest threats” in the institution’s 157-year history. In testimony before state lawmakers, Milliken outlined a looming financial crisis sparked by sweeping federal funding cuts and unprecedented political demands from the Trump administration.
The UC system — spanning 10 campuses, five medical centers, and serving hundreds of thousands of students and patients — receives more than $17 billion in federal funds annually. That includes $9.9 billion in Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements, $5.7 billion in research dollars, and $1.9 billion in student financial aid. According to Milliken, much of this funding is now at risk.
Already, UCLA alone has seen more than $500 million in research grants cut. On top of that, the administration has levied a $1.2 billion penalty against the system, alleging that UCLA and other campuses failed to adequately address antisemitism.
“These shortfalls, combined with the administration’s punitive demands, could devastate our university and cause enormous harm to our students, our patients, and all Californians,” Milliken warned. He has requested at least $4 to $5 billion annually in state aid to blunt the impact of federal cuts.
More Than a Budget Fight
The Trump administration has tied federal funding to sweeping political conditions, including:
-
Release of detailed admissions data.
-
Restrictions on protests.
-
Elimination of race-related scholarships and diversity hiring.
-
A ban on gender-affirming care for minors at UCLA health centers.
Critics argue that these conditions amount to political blackmail, undermining both academic freedom and healthcare access.
California Governor Gavin Newsom denounced the federal measures as “extortion” and “a page out of the authoritarian playbook.” Thirty-three state legislators urged UC leaders “not to back down in the face of this political shakedown.”
Protesters in the Crossfire
Yet while UC leaders frame themselves as defenders of free inquiry, many students and faculty who have protested war, racism, and inequality have found themselves silenced by the very system that now claims victimhood.
-
2011 UC Davis Occupy Protest: Images of police casually pepper-spraying seated students went viral, symbolizing the university’s harsh response to peaceful dissent.
-
2019 UC Santa Cruz Graduate Worker Strike: Graduate students demanding a cost-of-living adjustment were fired, evicted, or disciplined rather than heard.
-
2022 UC Irvine Labor Strikes: Workers organizing for fair pay and job security faced heavy-handed tactics from administrators.
-
2023–24 Gaza Encampments: UC campuses, including UCLA and UC Berkeley, called in police to dismantle student encampments protesting U.S. and UC complicity in Israel’s war in Gaza. Dozens of students were arrested, suspended, or disciplined for their participation.
These incidents show a pattern: UC celebrates academic freedom in official statements, but clamps down when protests threaten its ties to corporate donors, political interests, or foreign governments.
As one Berkeley student put it during the Gaza protests: “The university claims it’s under attack from Trump’s censorship — but it censors us every single day.”
UC’s Own Accountability Problem
Beyond silencing dissent, UC has been unresponsive to many Californians on broader issues: rising tuition, limited in-state enrollment, reliance on low-paid adjuncts, and partnerships with corporations that profit from student debt and labor precarity. For many working families, UC feels less like a public institution and more like an elite research enterprise serving industry and politics.
This contradiction makes the current crisis double-edged. UC is indeed being targeted by the Trump administration, but it also faces a legitimacy crisis at home.
Looking Ahead
Milliken, who took office as UC President on August 1, is lobbying state lawmakers to commit billions annually to offset federal cuts. But UC’s survival may hinge not only on political deals in Sacramento, but also on whether it can rebuild trust with the Californians it has too often sidelined — including the protesters and whistleblowers who have been warning for years about its drift away from public accountability.
The larger struggle, then, is not just UC versus Washington. It is about whether a public university system can still live up to its mission of serving the people — not corporations, not politicians, and not the wealthy few who hold the purse strings.
Sources:
-
University of California Office of the President
-
California State Legislature records
-
Statements from Gov. Gavin Newsom
-
U.S. Department of Justice communications
-
Higher Education Inquirer archives on UC protest suppression and public accountability
-
Coverage of UC Davis pepper-spray incident (2011), UC Santa Cruz COLA strike (2019), UC Irvine labor strikes (2022), Gaza encampment crackdowns (2023–24)
Monday, September 1, 2025
Every Day Should Be Labor Day
As Americans celebrate Labor Day, the traditional holiday honoring workers, it is worth asking a blunt question: why do we set aside only one day to recognize the people who keep this country running? For the majority of working-class Americans, labor is not a seasonal event—it is a daily struggle. And yet, political and economic systems continue to undervalue, underpay, and exploit the very workforce that sustains them.
The numbers are stark. The U.S. Department of Labor reports that over 100 million Americans are part of the labor force. Yet median wages have barely budged in decades, while the top 1% of earners have seen their wealth multiply. In higher education, adjunct professors often earn less than $30,000 a year while carrying the teaching load of full-time faculty, and the majority of college graduates leave school with over $30,000 in student loan debt, only to find themselves in jobs that fail to utilize their skills or provide financial security.
The “gig economy” promised flexibility and empowerment, but in reality it has created precarious work with no benefits, no sick leave, and few protections. Companies like Amazon, Uber, and DoorDash rely on a workforce that bears nearly all the risk while executives reap outsized rewards. The same dynamic extends to knowledge industries: research assistants, graduate students, and postdocs often perform essential labor for universities without fair compensation, health care, or job security.
Labor Day should not simply celebrate the ideal of work—it should spotlight injustice. It should remind policymakers, university administrators, and corporate leaders that the human cost of economic growth is real and rising. Childcare costs, rent, healthcare premiums, and student debt are not abstract numbers—they are barriers that prevent workers from achieving economic stability or pursuing meaningful lives outside of work.
Across the country, workers are pushing back. Teachers strike to demand fair pay and better conditions. Nurses, long on the frontlines of a pandemic, advocate for safer staffing levels and respect. Fast-food workers, warehouse employees, and adjunct faculty organize for recognition and dignity. These struggles reveal a truth that is too often ignored: every worker deserves more than symbolic recognition; they deserve economic justice, security, and respect every single day of the year.
For policymakers, higher education leaders, and business executives, the lesson is clear: labor should not be celebrated just once a year. Fair wages, comprehensive benefits, and meaningful protections should be the baseline for every workplace. The fight for workers’ rights is ongoing, and the consequences of ignoring it are profound—not just for individual families, but for the health of the American economy itself.
This Labor Day, Americans should reflect on a simple truth: the nation thrives not because of CEOs, venture capitalists, or administrators, but because millions of people show up to work every day under conditions that are far from ideal. If respect for labor is genuine, it cannot be confined to a single Monday in September. Every day should be Labor Day.
Sources:
-
U.S. Department of Labor, Labor Force Statistics
-
Federal Reserve, Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households
-
National Center for Education Statistics, Adjunct Faculty Data
-
Economic Policy Institute, The State of American Wages
-
Brookings Institution, Gig Economy and Worker Precarity