| ||||||||||||||||||||
|
"No Kings" Day of Protest June 14, 2025 across the US. #NoKings. Send tips to Glen McGhee at gmcghee@aya.yale.edu.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||
|
The ongoing faculty strike at Wellesley College reveals, in stark terms, the reality of the two-tier faculty system that has come to define much of American higher education. Despite its reputation as a progressive liberal arts institution, Wellesley—like many of its peers—relies heavily on contingent faculty to carry out the core educational mission, while systematically denying them the security and respect afforded to their tenured counterparts.
At Wellesley, non-tenure-track (NTT) faculty make up about 30 percent of the teaching staff but are responsible for teaching 40 percent of the college’s classes. These educators are essential to the functioning of the institution, yet they are paid less, enjoy fewer benefits, and live with little to no job security. Only in January 2024 did they formally unionize, and since May, they have been negotiating what would be their first collective bargaining agreement. The protracted nature of these negotiations—and the college administration’s sluggish response—led to the strike, now stretching into its fourth week.
The strike has exposed the deep fissures between NTT and tenure-track faculty. In response to the disruption, the administration asked tenured professors to take on additional students, offer independent studies, or otherwise fill in for their striking colleagues. No additional compensation was offered. Faculty were given less than 48 hours to decide whether to participate. The move created a moral and professional dilemma: Should tenured faculty support their striking colleagues by refusing to cross the picket line, or should they prioritize the needs of students—particularly those whose immigration status or financial aid depended on maintaining full-time academic standing?
In many ways, this is the real function of the two-tier system. It doesn't just allow institutions to save money by underpaying a significant portion of their teaching workforce. It also creates structural divisions that can be exploited in times of labor unrest. The privileged position of tenured faculty makes them natural pressure points for the administration, able to be guilted or coerced into mitigating the effects of a strike without fundamentally changing the system that caused it.
Driving this system are university presidents and senior administrators who increasingly adopt corporate, anti-labor management styles. These leaders often frame themselves as neutral actors mediating between stakeholders, but their actions tell a different story. In their refusal to negotiate in good faith, their last-minute crisis planning, and their strategic deployment of fear—around students’ financial aid, immigration status, and graduation timelines—they reveal a deep alignment with union-busting tactics more often seen in the private sector. These administrative strategies not only weaken labor solidarity, but also erode the educational environment they claim to protect.
What’s happening at Wellesley is not unique. It mirrors a broader pattern across higher education, where elite institutions rely on the labor of contingent faculty while denying them the protections and prestige of tenure. This isn’t a bug in the system—it is the system. The two-tier model is not about flexibility or innovation, as administrators often claim. It’s about control and cost containment, and when challenged, colleges will invoke crisis—whether financial, academic, or humanitarian—to maintain that control.
In this moment, Wellesley’s administration has positioned tenured faculty as potential strikebreakers, students as bargaining chips, and contingent faculty as expendable. The strike, and the response to it, underscores the urgent need to dismantle the exploitative structures that underpin so many American colleges. Until that happens—and until college presidents are held accountable for anti-labor tactics—students and faculty alike will continue to suffer, not only from instability, but from the erosion of trust and shared purpose in the academic community.
Tuition has increased faster than inflation. State funding has increased faster than inflation. Administrator salaries have increased faster than inflation. Yet, the administration is demanding that the teachers, librarians, and researchers who drive the university’s educational mission take real wage cuts.
While everyone acknowledges the financial challenges facing higher education, the UO is receiving more money per student than ever before. If this money isn’t going toward student education and knowledge creation, where is it going?
The Facts:
Quality Education Requires Investment in Faculty
The value of a University of Oregon degree depends on the quality of its professors, instructors, researchers, and librarians. When faculty wages erode due to artificial austerity, neglect, or slow attrition, it affects not only the quality of education and research, but also the long-term value of a UO degree for students and alumni alike.
Faculty Sacrificed to Protect UO—Now It’s Time for Fair Wages
During the pandemic, faculty agreed to potential pay reductions to help UO weather an uncertain financial future. We made sacrifices to ensure the university could continue to serve students. Now, as we bargain our first post-pandemic contract, the administration refuses to offer wage increases that:
Our Vision for UO: Excellence in Teaching & Research
The University of Oregon’s mission is clear:
“The University of Oregon is a comprehensive public research university committed to exceptional teaching, discovery, and service. We work at a human scale to generate big ideas. As a community of scholars, we help individuals question critically, think logically, reason effectively, communicate clearly, act creatively, and live ethically.”
Our vision for the University of Oregon is one where the educational and research mission are at the fore; an institution of higher learning where we attract and maintain the best researchers and instructors and provide a world class education for the citizens of Oregon and beyond. Yes, this will take a shift in economic priorities, but only back to those before the pandemic. Our demands are neither extravagant nor frivolous. Our demand is that the fiduciaries of the University of Oregon perform their primary fiduciary duty: support the mission of the University of Oregon.
Why This Matters Now
We are currently in state-mandated mediation, a final step before a potential faculty strike. Striking is a last resort—faculty do not want to disrupt student learning. However, the administration’s arguments for austerity do not align with the university’s financial situation or acknowledge the increased faculty labor and inflated economic reality since the pandemic. If the administration does not relent, we may have no choice but to strike.
We Need Your Support
A strong show of support from the UO community—students, parents, alumni, donors, legislators and citizens of Oregon and beyond—can help pressure the administration to do the right thing.
The Higher Education Inquirer (HEI) is in solidarity with nonviolent protests against the Trump administration. Two upcoming events include a 24-hour boycott of Amazon, Walmart, and Best Buy (February 28th) and a 10-day General Strike. We hope enough people join these and other nonviolent protests to make our messages heard loudly enough. To our readers, if you know of any public protests and other nonviolent acts of civil disobedience that we can highlight, please contact us.
Related links:
Protests Under Trump 2017-2021 (Pressman, et al, 2022)
Timeline of protests against Donald Trump (Wikipedia)
List of incidents of civil unrest in the United States (Wikipedia)
The Higher Education Inquirer (HEI) champions the rights of academic workers and critically examines the changing landscape of work in higher education, connecting it to broader economic trends
Focus on Adjunct Faculty and Labor Conditions:
HEI frequently highlights the precarious working conditions of adjunct faculty (grad assistants, contingent instructors, and researchers) who make up a significant portion of the teaching workforce in higher education, especially in online programs. It draws attention to issues such as low pay, lack of job security, limited benefits, and the increasing reliance on contingent labor in academia. This coverage exposes the exploitation of academic workers and its impact on educational quality.
Connection Between Education and Employment:
The Higher Education Inquirer explores the link between higher education and the job market, questioning whether certain programs adequately prepare students for gainful employment. It raises concerns about "hypercredentialism," where degrees become mere "tickets to be punched" without necessarily leading to meaningful work or sufficient income to repay student loans. HEI investigates the job placement rates of graduates from different types of institutions, particularly for-profit colleges and online programs, and highlights instances where these rates may be misleading or inflated.
Impact of Technology on Work:
The Higher Education Inquirer examines how technology is changing the nature of work, both within and outside of higher education. It discusses the rise of the "gig economy" and the increasing prevalence of precarious employment in the tech sector and related industries. The publication explores the potential for automation and artificial intelligence to displace human workers, raising concerns about job security and the future of work. This technological shift is often driven by corporate interests, which HEI critically examines.
Critique of Corporate Influence and Profit-Driven Models:
HEI is critical of the increasing influence of corporations and profit-driven models in higher education and the broader economy. We argue that the pursuit of profit often comes at the expense of workers' rights, job quality, and the overall well-being of individuals. This critique extends to the "tech bro" culture and its emphasis on maximizing profits and technological advancement, often without regard for the social and economic consequences.
Advocacy for Workers and a More Equitable Economy:
The Higher Education Inquirer advocates for fair labor practices, decent wages, and greater economic equality. It supports efforts to organize workers and challenge exploitative practices in various industries, including higher education. The publication promotes a more human-centered approach to work, emphasizing the importance of meaningful employment, job security, and a balance between work and life.
The Higher Education Inquirer provides significant coverage of labor strikes, particularly those within the higher education sector. HEI offers detailed accounts of specific labor strikes, providing context, timelines, and analysis of the issues at stake. For example, they've covered:
The 2023 Rutgers University strike.
The August 2024 strike by UAW Region 9 workers at Cornell University.
Focus on the Underlying Issues: The Higher Education Inquirer goes beyond simply reporting on the events of a strike. They delve into the root causes, such as: low wages and inadequate benefits for academic workers (including graduate students, adjuncts, and other staff), job insecurity and the increasing reliance on contingent labor, issues related to fair contracts, bargaining in good faith, and protection of union activity, and the impact of university policies and management decisions on workers' rights and well-being.
Highlighting the Voices of Workers:
HEI often includes the perspectives and experiences of the striking workers themselves, giving them a platform to share their stories and explain their reasons for striking. This humanizes the issues and provides a more personal understanding of the impact of labor disputes.
Connecting Strikes to Broader Trends
The Higher Education Inquirer connects individual strikes to larger trends in higher education and the economy, such as: The increasing corporatization of universities. The rise of precarious employment and the gig economy. The growing gap between executive compensation and worker wages. The impact of austerity measures and budget cuts on public institutions.
Advocacy for Workers' Rights and Collective Action
HEI supports the right of workers to organize and strike for better working conditions. They frame labor strikes as a legitimate and necessary tool for workers to exercise their power and demand fair treatment.
The Higher Education Inquirer views the nature of work as an integral part of the larger discussion about higher education. It recognizes that education is often linked to employment outcomes and that the quality of work available to graduates is a crucial factor in determining the value of a degree. By examining the working conditions of academic staff, the connection between education and employment, and the broader impact of technology and corporate influence on the labor market, the Higher Education Inquirer provides a comprehensive and critical perspective on the nature of work in the 21st century.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|