Showing posts sorted by relevance for query union. Sort by date Show all posts

Monday, June 23, 2025

Cornell Grad Union Turmoil: Miscommunication, Mistrust, and Muddled Messaging

A storm is brewing at Cornell University, and it's not about grades or research deadlines. Instead, it’s a tangled fight over dues, deductions, and the real meaning of union representation. What began as a landmark moment for graduate student labor has devolved into a confusing and frustrating ordeal—marked by unclear messaging, clashing narratives, and growing mistrust.

At the center of this dispute is a disagreement over the nature of the union contract ratified by the Cornell Graduate Students United (CGSU-UE Local 300). Many graduate workers believe they voted on a contract that clearly offered three options: join the union and pay dues, decline membership but pay an agency fee, or claim a sincerely held religious belief and donate the equivalent amount to one of three designated charities. This religious exemption is grounded in the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) definition, which can include moral or ethical beliefs.

Despite this seemingly open-shop structure, union leadership has continued to claim that they won a union shop agreement. A flyer circulated by CGSU recently declared, “We did not fight so hard for union shop just for Cornell to deny its implementation.” But many students say that this doesn’t match the actual text of the contract they voted on. A growing number are asking how a union shop can exist when the contract explicitly allows for a charitable opt-out. One graduate student wrote online, “Union shop was never won. You told us to vote for the contract that explicitly had an open shop.”

Further compounding the confusion is the union’s omission of the charitable opt-out in key communications. According to student posts on Reddit, CGSU has failed to mention this third option in emails and on its website, where it only refers to the options of paying dues or agency fees. Reddit user hexaflexarex noted that while the contract technically isn’t a union shop, the requirement that charitable donations match union dues makes it functionally similar. Still, they criticized the union for not being more transparent, and pointed out that Cornell is now refusing to process payroll deductions because of this lack of clarity.

Cornell’s position, as interpreted from internal correspondence, appears to be that CGSU’s failure to advertise the religious exemption violates the agreement. The university has suspended all payroll deductions—meaning neither dues nor agency fees are being collected—until the union adequately informs workers of their options and provides the proper authorization forms. But questions remain about who is responsible for issuing those forms. Some students say CGSU has already sent out union card-signing forms, which authorize dues deductions. Others argue the union has not clearly made the forms available or has not clarified how the religious opt-out process works.

The r/Cornell subreddit has become a hotspot for dissecting the situation, with graduate students passionately debating everything from contract law to the ethics of organized labor. Some say the union is bungling its responsibilities. Others argue Cornell is seizing on a technicality to undermine the union. One user pointed out that the union’s religious exemption clause is actually broader than what is required by law, potentially making the “open shop” argument even stronger. Another user, VeganRiblets, noted that the contract refers vaguely to EEOC definitions instead of explicitly stating “moral or ethical beliefs,” which has led to unnecessary confusion. “Cornell made a mistake by not insisting on more explicit language,” they said. “Not that it excuses the union’s misleading messaging, but this could have been avoided.”

Tensions are high. The union says it is merely implementing the strongest union shop clause it could within legal boundaries, given the restrictions imposed by Supreme Court rulings like Janus v. AFSCME. Critics say the union overpromised and underdelivered, misleading its members and failing to communicate its strategy. One grad student summed up the frustration: “That email chain is very helpful though. Good to know that the union leadership communicates just as poorly with the admin as they do with bargaining unit members.”

Others accuse the union of focusing too heavily on political causes outside the scope of labor negotiations, and squandering bargaining leverage that could have been used to secure better pay or healthcare. Meanwhile, the administration is accused of stonewalling and weaponizing ambiguity to avoid honoring the financial commitments in the contract.

Even the most engaged students seem unsure what exactly they signed up for. A recent post perhaps captured the bewilderment best: “We’re all here to get PhDs. I am certain we are smart enough to figure this out.” But even PhD students need clarity and honesty. At this point, both the union and the university have failed to provide either. If Cornell’s graduate labor movement is going to move forward, it must start with a simple step: telling the truth, plainly and completely, to the people it represents.

Monday, July 7, 2025

Harvard Removes 800 Graduate Students From Union, Citing Employment Status

Harvard University has removed roughly 800 graduate students from the Harvard Graduate Students Union–United Auto Workers (HGSU-UAW), asserting that they are not employees and therefore not entitled to union representation. The move has drawn criticism from labor advocates and student organizers and raises broader questions about the future of graduate labor rights in U.S. higher education.

According to The Harvard Crimson, the affected students receive research-based stipends but do not hold formal teaching or administrative appointments. In recent communications to faculty and the union, Harvard administrators stated that these students “are not employees under the National Labor Relations Act and do not have the right to unionize.” The university said that its position is based on recent rulings by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), including decisions involving similar cases at MIT and Brown University.

Harvard’s message to the union and faculty further claimed that “Harvard has never agreed that non-employees should be included in the unit.” This interpretation removes a substantial portion—approximately 15 percent—of the union’s former membership, weakening its bargaining position just as the union’s initial contract expired at the end of the 2025 fiscal year.

Union leaders have pushed back. Sara V. Speller, president of the HGSU-UAW, told The Crimson that the union is “working closely with the UAW and exploring our options.” The union has previously challenged Harvard’s stance in arbitration and won a favorable ruling related to the inclusion of research-focused psychology graduate students, though that case is now under federal review.

Harvard’s reclassification is not occurring in isolation. It comes in the context of ongoing efforts by elite universities to limit the reach of graduate student unions by drawing a line between academic training and paid labor. While the 2016 Columbia decision by the NLRB affirmed that graduate students at private universities could be classified as employees, recent decisions under a changing board composition have opened the door for reinterpretation. Harvard's legal strategy appears aligned with these more conservative rulings.

The Higher Education Inquirer has long supported the labor rights of contingent faculty, staff, and student workers, including graduate students whose research and teaching responsibilities serve as critical infrastructure in the academic enterprise. The removal of 800 graduate students from union protections reflects a broader pattern of university administrations attempting to limit collective bargaining power and redefine the boundaries of academic labor.

The implications of Harvard’s decision go beyond Cambridge. As other universities monitor the fallout, they may follow suit, especially as labor board interpretations shift with the political winds in Washington. In this climate, labor unions representing graduate students, adjunct faculty, and staff will need to navigate an increasingly complex terrain—one where administrative classification may determine who gets a voice at the bargaining table.

Graduate students affected by the reclassification may continue receiving stipends and conducting research, but they will no longer have access to grievance procedures, union-led negotiations, or other protections afforded to employees. Those who also serve as teaching fellows or hold research assistantships tied to grants will retain their union eligibility—for now.

For many observers, this case underscores the fragility of labor rights in higher education. It also reveals the persistent tension between the educational missions universities claim to uphold and the employment realities that sustain their operations. As Harvard redefines its labor boundaries, the national debate about who counts as a worker in academia grows sharper—and more urgent.

Sunday, June 29, 2025

Coalition Building: UFF Activists Learn from Flight Attendants and Construction Workers (HELU Blog)

[Editor's note: This article first appeared at the Higher Education Labor United blog.]

In Florida, where Governor Ron DeSantis was carrying out Trump-style attacks on higher education before the 2024 election, the United Faculty of Florida, a statewide union, gathered organizers from various chapters and joined with other unions to hold a Worker’s Forum in Miami Springs, facilitated by the Miami-Dade DSA. – Editor

From Chris Robé, Professor of Film and Media Studies, Delegate to HELU, Vice-President of United Faculty of Florida, Florida Atlantic University

United Faculty of Florida (UFF), our faculty union, represents more than 25,000 full-time faculty members. During our union’s inception in the early 1970s, it intended on representing all campus workers. But by the time the bargaining unit was defined, only full-time faculty were included.

It is high time to revisit that bolder strategy of organizing all those sectors associated with higher education as HELU has proposed in its bold “wall-to-wall, coast-to-coast” strategy. This inspired a crew of us in Florida to hold our own statewide organizers meeting from various UFF chapters. Coalition building continued more recently as the chapters of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach facilitated the South Florida Workers’ Forum on May 31st in Miami Springs at the AFL-CIO hall.

A few of us from various UFF chapters participated and attended with other members from the Communications Workers of America, UNITE HERE, Starbucks Workers United, Association of Flight Attendants, National Association of Letter Carriers, International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, American Federation of Government Employees, the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists, WeCount!, and many other organizations. A little over eighty people were in attendance.

The day consisted of four panels that addressed issues of: building union power; forming a union; fighting against state repression; and organizing for migrant justice. Between four and five people, each representing a different union, spoke briefly about each issue. Spanish translation was offered for those speaking exclusively in Spanish. Sub sandwiches, drinks and chips were provided in the back of the hall throughout the day.

I have written about this event more extensively in my blog, Dispatches from the Academic Trenches, so I will only highlight two inspiring moments during the forum. During the panel on forming a new union, Michael Baez, a flight attendant, mentioned that he was charged with assessing all five-hundred flight attendants’ attitude towards forming a union within his hub. He was the only organizer. Yet one could see in his friendly, upbeat disposition, he was the perfect person for the task. With a wide smile on his face, he informed us how he tried to raise fellow workers’ class-consciousness on flights while they engage in “jump seat therapy,” a term used to describe the way coworkers bare their life stories to each other out of earshot of customers while sitting across from each other during moments of rest.

Jairo, a construction worker who belongs to WeCount!, an immigrant-led workers’ organization, recounted in Spanish his efforts to make construction sites safer. He stated at one point: “We came here with suitcases in our hands in the pursuit of the American Dream. Instead, we find bosses trying to shortchange us and creating unsafe working conditions.” At the end of his talk, he held up his two calloused hands saying: “Remember: these are the hands that helped build Miami. These are also the hands that are building the union.”

It is hard to imagine a more difficult task of organizing workers after the end of a long shift working in construction or on a flight. But these workers served as testimony of doing so. Those of us in academia, where we set many of our own working hours and can use our site of employment for recruiting, have a rather privileged position compared to these other workers.

The opposition is counting on us staying siloed, keeping our heads down, and trying to wait all of this out. But as these speakers at the South Florida Worker’s Forum emphasized, we are all involved in this fight regardless if we acknowledge it or not. The only remaining question is: do we want to fight to strengthen our and others’ communities, work in coalitions and develop friendships and strategies with one another; or do we want to keep taking blows, time after time, day after day, year after year, until we ultimately no longer feel anything at all?

Monday, July 14, 2025

NEA, Trump, and Fascism

At the 2025 National Education Association (NEA) Representative Assembly in Portland, Oregon, the nation’s largest teachers union passed a resolution condemning Donald Trump and aligning itself against what it termed “fascism.” But the resolution went viral for all the wrong reasons—because the NEA misspelled “fascism” twice as “facism.” Critics pounced, and what might have been a serious political statement turned into a national punchline.

The NEA resolution declared that “the members and material resources of NEA must be committed to the defense of the democratic and educational conditions required for the survival of civilization itself” and pledged $3,500 in resources to support education against “facism.” The intent was clear: the union was signaling that Trump and his allies represent a threat to democracy and education. But the message was undermined by the basic literacy failure of the very educators tasked with teaching students how to spell.

The resolution passed in a closed-door session, as part of a growing trend among major unions to explicitly engage in anti-Trump activism. It also included language opposing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids and called for support of “mass democratic movements” in response to Trump’s possible return to power. Further, the NEA reaffirmed its decision to disaffiliate from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), citing concerns about the ADL’s stance on policing and Palestine.

The backlash was swift. Conservative pundits and right-wing lawmakers ridiculed the resolution’s spelling errors and denounced its political content as extremist. Representative Jim Walsh called it “hysterical slander” and mocked the NEA’s failure to meet even minimal professional standards. Moms for Liberty co-founder Tina Descovich said the NEA’s mistake exemplifies why many Americans believe public education is failing. Corey DeAngelis, a leading advocate for school choice, declared the situation “too rich to parody.”

The episode lit up right-wing media. The New York Post ran multiple pieces lampooning the union’s politics and literacy. Fox News accused the NEA of pushing a radical political agenda under the guise of professional development. Critics from across the political spectrum asked: how can educators credibly combat fascism if they can’t spell it?

But spelling errors aside, the deeper issue is the NEA’s increasing politicization in an already polarized era. While some educators and progressives cheered the resolution as a necessary stand against authoritarianism, others worried it would damage public trust in the profession and provide more ammunition for anti-union and school privatization forces.

The NEA has long walked a tightrope between its role as a labor union and as a political actor. In the Trump and post-Trump era, that tightrope is fraying. By elevating its political messaging—especially when done sloppily—the NEA risks alienating moderate members, energizing conservative opposition, and undermining its own credibility as a steward of public education.

This latest controversy may not be the NEA’s last misstep in an increasingly volatile political climate. But it is a cautionary tale. To confront genuine threats to democracy and education, unions must do more than pass resolutions. They must build trust, demonstrate competence, and articulate a vision that unites rather than divides. If they can’t even proofread their own declarations, the fight against fascism may start with a dictionary.

Sources
National Education Association, Resolution NBI 79, 2025 Representative Assembly
New York Post, “Largest US teachers union mocked for misspelling 'fascism' in anti-Trump agenda item,” July 10, 2025
Fox News, “Teachers union reveals true colors behind closed doors at annual convention,” July 11, 2025
The Free Press, “NEA Teachers' Union Goes All In on Politics—And Spelling Errors,” July 11, 2025
WBZ News Radio, “Largest US Teachers Union Misspells ‘Fascism’ While Bashing Trump,” July 11, 2025
Yahoo News, “Social media erupts as nation's largest teachers union misspells 'fascism' in anti-Trump statement,” July 12, 2025

Tuesday, July 1, 2025

Without a Union, Expect More Layoffs: Southern New Hampshire University Employees Face Corporate Restructuring and Uncertainty

Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU), once hailed as a pioneer in online learning and educational innovation, is now facing growing unrest among employees as the institution continues down a path of corporate-style restructuring. Recent anonymous posts from internal forums reveal widespread fear, frustration, and anger following another round of layoffs—despite the university publicly celebrating its financial milestones.

“We are no longer people at SNHU—we’re financial liabilities,” one employee wrote. “Update your resumes. Prepare for the worst.”

The layoffs, reportedly targeting senior staff and long-time employees, come on the heels of previous job cuts last year—cuts that were soon followed by executive bonuses. Employees describe this tactic as a way to soften the blow while giving the remaining workforce a false sense of stability. That illusion, insiders say, is long gone.

This is no longer the institution led by Paul LeBlanc, the former president widely respected for his student- and staff-centered approach. Since the transition to President Lisa Marsh Ryerson, many employees say the university’s priorities have shifted toward financial engineering and aggressive cost-cutting.

One employee remarked, “Lisa’s mission is to operate the university like a business where dollars mean more than the people who made the university what it is. This would have never happened under Paul’s leadership.”

Even as SNHU publicly announced it had met its 6% financial growth target, more jobs were slashed—raising questions about the true motivation behind the downsizing. “Can we expect layoffs every nine months moving forward?” another asked.

A disturbing pattern is emerging: layoffs before the fiscal year closes, speculation about keeping operations just shy of the $1 billion revenue threshold, and vague communications about “regular assessments,” interpreted by employees as a euphemism for frequent cuts.

Adding to the frustration are apparent contradictions between internal messaging and actual spending. A former ITS (Information Technology Services) staffer recounted that for over a year before the layoffs began, leadership warned technical teams—especially at University Management (UM)—about “just keeping the lights on.” However, these austerity signals were contradicted by internal requests to research high-cost specialty equipment for UM ITS staff. “I guess the lights aren’t that important to her,” the employee said, referencing CF, a decision-maker believed to have pushed the tech purchases despite the budget warnings.

This kind of internal inconsistency is emblematic of the confusion and distrust now rampant among SNHU staff. Mixed signals, strategic ambiguity, and cost-cutting cloaked in business jargon have eroded morale.

The Missing Shield: Why SNHU Workers Need a Labor Union

At the heart of SNHU’s internal crisis is the glaring absence of worker protection. Simply put: without a union, there is no defense against what’s coming next.

Layoffs. Outsourcing. Pay stagnation. Arbitrary restructuring. All of these are happening in the dark, without employee input, transparency, or any mechanism to push back. At SNHU—despite its size and influence—there is no faculty or staff union. And that leaves every worker vulnerable.

A labor union would change the power dynamics. With collective bargaining rights, employees could demand transparency in budgeting, negotiate job protections, and ensure that executive bonuses are not prioritized over staff livelihoods. Unions also provide grievance procedures, democratic voice in institutional decisions, and solidarity against exploitative management practices.

The pattern at SNHU is clear: it’s not a temporary adjustment—it’s a business model. A model that treats human beings as “cost centers” to be trimmed, regardless of their contributions or years of service.

One employee wrote, “They’re going to outsource everything they can.” Without a union, there’s little stopping that from happening.

While public university systems often have unionized faculty and staff with some degree of insulation from abrupt cuts, SNHU’s private, nonprofit status allows leadership to operate with near-total discretion. The only viable counterbalance is organized labor.

If SNHU employees want to end the cycle of fear, protect their jobs, and begin rebuilding an institution that values people, they will need more than nostalgia for past leadership—they will need solidarity, and a union to anchor it.

The warning is clear. And the lesson is simpler still: without a union, expect more layoffs.

Wednesday, April 12, 2023

Rutgers University Workers Waging Historic Strike For Economic Justice (Hank Kalet)

Editors note: The Higher Education Inquirer thanks Hank Kalet for allowing us to reprint his substack Channel Surfing as a record of the Rutgers strike. Hank is a . We encourage you to subscribe to his substack and visit the Rutgers AAUP-AFT and Rutgers Adjunct Faculty Union twitter pages.

You can donate to the strike fund at https://rafup.betterworld.org/donate

Post-Strike Diary: A Step Back and Some History
The Fight Here at Rutgers Is Not Over, Nor Is It an Isolated Battle

I want to get back to first principles. Put the strike at Rutgers into the broader context of higher ed and contingent worker right. Connect it to the larger currents in the labor movement.

The 40 years starting with Ronald Reagan’s election were awful ones for labor unions. Union activity had already peaked when Reagan fired striking air-traffic controllers and signaled to business that the era of labor peace on the employer side was over.

I worked in a factory in Trenton that summer. There were whispers that union organizing was taking place, but it wasn’t gaining much traction. Factory jobs were leaving the state and the Northeast and there was fear that management would close shop and move to Georgia, Alabama, or another anti-union state. Reagan’s action was the final straw, dooming the efforts, and setting in motion a frenzy of union busting we are still struggling to understand. (I’m working on a play about this moment.)

The 40 years that followed were mostly dark for the union movement, with some victories. Some of this darkness was brought on by the unions themselves, many of which had calcified and were either corrupt or overly cozy with management and politicians. Grassroots energy was dismissed and reform efforts short-lived.

The Covid pandemic shifted the terrain. Donna Murch, a union colleague and associate professor of history at Rutgers, has been making the case that Covid laid bare the vulnerabilities of all faculty members and all workers at Rutgers. Covid forced classes online with little assistance and no compensation for the work needed to make that happen. It put clinicians and lab workers in peril, requiring them to work through the pandemic often without proper PPE. It disrupted grad students’ research, even as their funding clock continued to tick.

This precarity was evident throughout society, a realization that led to union drives at Amazon, Starbucks, and other companies that relied on short-term and/or low-paid workers. Warehouse workers — many immigrants, some undocumented— often faced the worst conditions.

Those of us with a level of economic privilege were able to pay folks in the gig economy to do our grocery shopping and provide needed services, allowing Im us to stay home.

Unemployment shot up, wages stagnated with the economy, and the fascistic wing of the Republican Party — those most aligned with then-President Trump and opposed to vaccines, masks, and those who violently responded to the Black Lives Matter protests that spread after the state murder of George Floyd — cracked down and continue to crackdown on efforts to expand opportunity and inclusion.

This is the backdrop against which we have to judge the current wave of organizing and strikes — a movement that is gaining traction in ways we have not seen in a long time.

Gallup reports:

Seventy-one percent of Americans now approve of labor unions. Although statistically similar to last year's 68%, it is up from 64% before the pandemic and is the highest Gallup has recorded on this measure since 1965.

Union density remains an issue, though this is likely because of the legal impediments erected over 40-plus years of aggressive anti-union activity from both parties, abetted by a media infrastructure that has lost its connections to workers.

News coverage of labor is lagging badly behind this surge of organizing. The loss of labor as a beat has created a structural coverage deficit that, in practical terms, means reporters are reporting and writing stories with at best a limited background on labor issues and dynamics, including how labor law works and just how much power the bosses have accumulated over the years. The upshot is a series of stories throughout the press that boils nearly every labor dispute down to money, or that filters these disputes through an earlier lens in which each dispute is a singular event unrelated to the larger American economy.

The reality, as we discussed in my class today, is that the current wave of organizing is about more than money. It is about life conditions, workplace conditions, about safety and scheduling, and long-term job security. Starbucks workers want more control of their schedules, more regularity, so they can plan their lives. Amazon workers and others working in the new mostly unregulated warehouse industry want safety rules, regular breaks, sick time. The rail workers, who were thrown onto the tracks by President Joe Biden, want an end to the kind of scheduling that results in exhaustion and dangerous conditions — one of the many factors that resulted in the deadly East Palestine crash.

Adjuncts and grads at Rutgers and other institutions of higher education want raises. But we also want respect. We want job security — big raises mean little if we can be fired or laid off easily. We want a shift in values in higher ed away from the current model, which is more focused on creating a profit (big reserve accounts and endowments that can be invested to generate bigger reserves and endowments), on building sports empires, on turning faculty into grant chasers or replaceable cogs.

The framework in place at Rutgers is a start, but this contract fight is far from over. And even when this one ends, we know there will be more work to be done. This is the beginning of the transformation of higher ed, not the conclusion.

Post-Strike Diary: Rutgers Unions Fight On Historic Gains But Work To Be Done.

The strike is off, for now. But the efforts to remake Rutgers continues.

As I wrote Saturday, the unions representing striking workers voted to accept a contract framework in exchange for pausing the strike before it entered its second week. We paused to let students get back to classes. To let them finish their semester, their careers at Rutgers.

The framework includes a 14% raise over four years for full-time faculty, a 33% pay increase for grads over four years, a 25.5% bump for post-docs, and a 48% increase for adjuncts; multi-semester contracts for adjuncts, presumptive renewal of contracts, recognition of graduate fellows as grad workers, changes in grievance and evaluations procedures, and five-year funding for grads. The framework also includes elements of the “Bargaining for the Common Good” agenda: a $600,000 recurring Community Fund and the end of the university policy that prevents students from registering for classes or getting transcripts or diplomas due to unpaid fines and fees, and a Union-University-Community table.

Much of this is historic, but it’s still a work in progress. The clinicians, researchers, and professors represented by BHSNJ-AAUP have nothing from administration, and more needs to be done for grads, for students and the community, and for adjuncts.

That was the message Monday afternoon as about 100 picketers gathered and chanted, reminding the community and the press that the battle to end the corporatization on higher ed continues — both here in New Jersey and nationally — continues.

Picketers carried strike signs with the word “suspended” stapled above “On Strike.” We marched intro of Scott Hall on College Avenue chanting, “The strike may be suspended. The struggle hasn’t ended.” We did his despite the cold win blowing own College Avenue as students looked on. We have more actions planned this week, part of a rolling set of protests designed to keep our issues in front of the public and to maintain pressure on an administration that failed to take us seriously until we walked and the governor got involved.

I told NBC New York that we could reinstate the strike if management fails to play ball. A threat? Idle talk? I’ll leave it at that. But we’re not going away. We’re not backing down.

RU Strike Diary, Day 5 Ends With a 'Framework'

We have a framework for a deal and are pausing the strike that has shut down Rutgers University for the last five days. I’m being careful of the language. We don’t have a deal and we have not ended the strike. We have a framework. There remain a lot issues to address, but most of the big ones are settled. The framework takes us a long way toward our demands of equal pay, job security, better pay for grads, and making Rutgers a better neighbor. It is not a perfect deal. We wanted more. But I think we moved the ball far down the field. This is not the final battle, but part of a larger movement.

Cliches. Platitudes. Bromides.

But still accurate.

I think the deal is good for the workers and students involved, but I can’t say much about the details. The journalist in me bristles at this, but my role as a member of the adjunct faculty union executive board prohibits me from saying much more. This is in line with the week for me, a week in which I found myself on the other side of the reporter’s notebook. I’ve talked with more reporters this week than in my entire adult life.

I teach journalism at Rutgers as an adjunct. I became involved in the union effort in 2021 and have become more and more active. The more active I became, the more I learned about the inequities of higher ed. The more I learned about these inequities, the more I became involved.

This was the same for just about everyone I talked with all week. I spent five days on the lines in New Brunswick. It was hot. It was exhausting. It was thrilling. Turnout fluctuated and the size of the pickets on College Avenue varied from day to day. We probably hit 1,000 picketers on Tuesday afternoon, when the folks from Cook/Douglass and Livingston and Busch joined in a march up George Street to the administration building on the Old Queens campus (a small subsection of the College Avenue campus) and joined the College Avenue contingent in an emotional and forceful show of solidarity. Wednesday featured a wake-up tour of campus, while Friday offered a festive feel, even as talks were heating up in Trenton.

The larger experience was one of joy and unity. That does not mean everyone is happy, but we made massive gains and I think we need to acknowledge that.

The message I would offer to the public at this point is that academic workers are tired of being pushed around. We are tired of the corporate bent of higher ed, angry that universities have been coopted by big-time athletics, corporate-style governance and funding models, and that what should be their primary missions — education and research — have been sold off to funders who only care about how they can monetize their scientific discoveries.

We have watched as more and more teaching and research jobs have been remade as contingent, easily replaceable labor. We have watched as the humanities are decimated in favor of incredibly important STEM courses and programs, not because of academic need, but because STEM generates grant revenue.

Rutgers, like most American universities, operates as a corporation. Senior administrators, who often have a Master of Business Administration degree (MBA) with little or no experience in higher education, along with sports coaches who have the potential to earn the university money, are highly compensated while thousands of poorly paid educators and staff are denied job security and benefits. Adjunct faculty and graduate workers are often forced to apply for Medicaid. They frequently take second jobs teaching at other colleges, driving for Uber or Lyft, working as cashiers, delivering food for Grubhub or DoorDash, walking dogs, house sitting, waiting on tables, bartending and living four or six to an apartment or camping out on a friend’s sofa. This inversion of values is destroying the nation’s educational system.

This is why we have seen academic workers strike across the country, from California to Illinois to New York. The strike at Rutgers is part of this movement and, because of the university’s size and the fact that all three of its faculty unions walked out of class, might be the most important of these efforts. The University of California strike was larger, but as with all other walkouts it only featured mainly graduate students. The strike at The New School was about adjunct wages. At Temple, it was just grads. At Rutgers, I walked along side non-tenure-track professors, full professors, graduate students, undergraduates and allies from the area.

The framework — again, not a tentative agreement or a contract — goes some of the way toward addressing these issues at Rutgers and, if it is ratified, could stand as a model and the largest victory so far in the battle for the soul of the American university system.

RU Strike Diary, Day 4

Day four was a tougher haul. The heat had a draining effect on many of us, but we were out on the lines and we are committed to remaining out for as long as it takes to win the transformation we are demanding.

There are three unions on strike — AAUP-AFT, the Rutgers Adjunct Faculty Union, and BHSNJ-AFT. We are negotiating together. Fighting together.

Our demands:

*Equal pay for equal work and job security for adjuncts like me;
*A living wage and longer guaranteed funding for grad workers;
*Recognition of grad fellows as workers who should be part of the union;
*Job security for non-tenure-track professors;
*Protections for academic freedom;
*Control of schedules;
*Wages that keep up with inflation;
*An end to onerous fines on students and the practices of withholding class registration and transcripts and the sale of student debt to collection agencies;
*A rent freeze on Rutgers-owned properties;
*A community hardship fund;
*Health care for all workers;
*And numerous other changes in the way Rutgers operates.

Thursday featured numerous targeted pickets, which may have left the impression on College Ave that there were fewer people out. But we made joyful noise on Voorhees Mall and in front of Scott Hall, marched through the streets of the city to show solidarity with the community, marched on President Jonathan Holloway’s mansion in Piscataway, and on the homes of several members of the university Board of Governors.

Our pressure has had an effect. As our bargaining team has reported, the administration has been pushed significantly — by us and because of pressure for Gov. Phil Murphy. I’ve been critical of his public statements, but it’s clear he has contributed to at least some of the progress.

Make no mistake, however. We are winning this because we’ve out organized management, showed our commitment, and made the public case that we are engaged in a moral cause to bring equity to high ed, a message that is resonating beyond our campuses.

Bernie Sanders issued this video this week:

And I’ve talked to state and National reporters, including small labor and lefty print and video sites and a student TV station at James Madison in Virginia.

Power of the People Evident on the Pickets

Day 3 went much like Day 2, with massive pickets and a powerful rally in front of Winants Hall — home to Rutgers President Jonathan Holloway offices. There were drag queens, music, and a festive atmosphere — but hanging over it all was the specter of negotiations.

On Sunday night, Gov. Phil Murphy summoned both sides to Trenton, using his office to try to avert the strike — didn’t happened — and possibly get the dispute settled quickly. We walked, knowing this was the backdrop and brought hundreds upon hundreds of people into the streets — faculty, staff, community members, and students.

The rest of this post will be filled with photos, which should remind everyone how much energy and unity there is and to help keep our spirits high as this stretches into the fourth day.

More than a thousand strikers across the campuses is not something you ignore. And we’re planning to grow our already robust pickets every day until this strike ends.

Several images stood out for me from Day 2:

The massive picket that marched up College Avenue and circled the campus, led by students and faculty carrying a banner declaring “Equal Pay for Equal Work” — which has been the central fight of the adjunct union. Our demands were centered in this amazing march, as was a push for equity — for adjuncts, grad workers, students, and the community.

Rutgers functions like a corporation in too many ways, chewing up and spitting out vulnerable workers and the community in which it’s situated. It’s real estate practices — buying up properties across the city and either raising rents or gentrifying— are making New Brunswick unaffordable. It’s why we’re calling for a rent freeze on Rutgers’ properties, an end to predatory student fees and punitive actions when those fees and fines go unpaid, and a community fund to help our neighbors.

We’ve been saying that this strike is about faculty and students and the university’s largely poor and immigrant neighbors, and we mean it.

Later in the day came the mass convergence, when all of the New Brunswick picketing marched to the entrance gates of Old Queens, the origin point of Rutgers. Picketers from Cook and Douglass were joined by their colleagues from Busch and Livingston and marched down George Street through the center of town. They were joined by the Mason Gross School of the Arts and Edward Bloustein school and marched to meet the College Ave crew, creating a sea of picketers as we marched to Voorhees Mall and a not-quite impromptu party/rally.

I’m not one for hyperbole or sentimentality, so when I say it gave me chills the reader should understand I mean it.

More important, though, was the impact on the bargaining table. Our colleagues there were buoyed by our show of strength, our joy, outer commitment. And they are using it to their advantage. Management appears to be buckling, and we plan to keep this up until we win a better Rutgers, a kinder less corporate Rutgers.

RU Strike Diary, Day 1: The Inevitable Happens

This is where it’s been leading since the beginning. A historic strike at my alma mater. A school where I’ve taught journalism for 10 years. That I think is one of the best and most underrated institutions of higher learning in the country. From the beginning.

This is not what anyone wanted, but it’s what had to happen. Higher ed is in crisis. Rutgers is in crisis. We’ve been taken over by the corporate power structure. Had a change in mission crammed down our throats. Higher ed has become just another cog in the American oligarchy and Rutgers, despite its proclamations to the contrary, has been doing its part.

I was at UBS Arena last night watching Bruce Springsteen when we — our union’s executive boards — voted. I voted by proxy. It was unanimous. I listened and shouted and sang as the man known as The Boss tore through a catalogue of songs about working people. And the irony was not lost on me. Springsteen singing of working class dreams as he allowed Ticketmaster to drive up prices and BMW to offer exclusive parking.

Still, as my phone was blowing up with texts about the now very real strike, he broke into “Wrecking Ball” and the lines “So hold tight on your anger, you hold tight on your anger / Hold tight to your anger, don't fall to your fears” hit me like a truck.

We are angry. Tired of being disrespected. Tired of the neoliberal model of higher ed reducing everything to profit.

We’ll hold tight and fight. We’re going to win this.

Monday, June 23, 2025

McDonald’s Faces National Boycott as Economic Justice Movement Builds Momentum

McDonald’s, the fast-food titan with global reach and billion-dollar profits, is the latest corporate target in an escalating campaign of economic resistance. Starting June 24, grassroots advocacy organization The People's Union USA has called for a weeklong boycott of the chain, citing the need for “corporate accountability, real justice for the working class, and economic fairness.”

Branded the Economic Blackout Tour, the campaign seeks to channel consumer power into political and structural change. According to The People’s Union USA, Americans are urged to avoid not only McDonald’s restaurants but also fast food in general during the June 24–30 protest window. Previous actions have focused on companies like Walmart, Amazon, and Target—corporate behemoths long criticized for their low wages, union-busting tactics, and monopolistic behavior.

John Schwarz, founder of The People’s Union USA, has emerged as a vocal critic of corporate greed. In a recent video statement, Schwarz accused McDonald’s and its peers of dodging taxes and lobbying against wage increases. “Economic resistance is working,” he declared. “They’re feeling it. They’re talking about it.”

The movement is tapping into deep and widespread frustration—fueled by stagnant wages, rising living costs, and mounting corporate profits. While many Americans struggle with student loan debt, inadequate healthcare, and job insecurity, companies like McDonald’s have been accused of shielding their profits offshore and benefiting from political influence in Washington.

This is not the first time McDonald’s has come under fire. The company has faced criticism from labor rights groups for paying low wages, offering unpredictable schedules, and relying heavily on part-time or precarious employment. More recently, pro-Palestinian activists have also launched boycotts, citing alleged ties between McDonald’s franchises and Israeli military actions in Gaza.

As part of the current boycott, The People's Union USA is pushing for a broader shift in spending—away from multinational corporations and toward local businesses and cooperatives. In line with previous actions, the group is also encouraging Americans to cut back on streaming, online shopping, and all fast-food purchases during the boycott period.

With Independence Day on the horizon, Schwarz and his allies are framing the protest as not just economic, but patriotic. “It’s time to demand fairness,” Schwarz said, “and to use our economic power as leverage to fight for real freedom—the kind that includes fair wages, democratic workplaces, and tax justice.”

While McDonald’s has not released an official response to the boycott, a 2019 letter from company lobbyist Genna Gent suggested the chain would not actively oppose federal minimum wage increases. For Schwarz and his supporters, such declarations ring hollow without meaningful action.

The July target for The People’s Union USA? Starbucks, Amazon, and Home Depot—three more corporate giants with long histories of labor disputes and political entanglements. The next wave of boycotts will extend throughout the entire month, further testing the staying power and impact of this new consumer-led resistance.

At a time when higher education, particularly the for-profit and online sectors, often channels students into low-wage service jobs with crushing debt, these campaigns raise larger questions about the role of universities in perpetuating corporate power and economic inequality.

The Higher Education Inquirer will continue to follow these developments, especially as they intersect with issues of labor, student debt, corporate influence, and the broader fight for economic justice in the United States.

Sunday, November 20, 2022

University of California Academic Workers Strike For Economic Justice

This space was here to lend a voice to the 48,000 academic workers from the University of California system who started their strike on November 14th. Graduate student workers remained on the picket line for nearly six weeks before voting yes to an agreement on December 23.

This group of UC employees was not the first or the last collective of academic workers to strike, but their struggle has become a model for other academic union campaigns. The Higher Education Inquirer has been in solidarity with this effort for economic justice, where unfair labor practices are commonplace and systemic.

The outcome of the long University of California strike was a solid victory for democratic action--but not surprisingly, some of the most vulnerable workers received the least in return for their efforts.

There were many takeaways--lessons learned--in this long fight--a fight that was years in the making--and that must continue. Imagine if adjuncts, students, rank-and-file workers, organized labor, and other related communities fought just as hard (and smart) to reduce homelessness, hunger, hate and violence, debt, and precarity.

Elite Universities and the Systematic Exploitation of Labor

US mainstream media have rarely acknowledged the plight of non-tenured academic workers--who go by a number of titles. This precariat teaches undergraduate students and does much of the research at universities, including elite US universities, for modest wages and limited job security.

While elite private and public schools have gained enormous power and wealth, many contingent academic laborers often struggle just paying their bills. Grad student workers have shared stories of living in their cars, commuting long distances, and enduring other hardships while working through school.

In order to get economic justice, academic workers have struggled for union representation and equitable labor contracts--with limited results.

The original strikers consisted of four bargaining units with about 48,000 workers:

*Academic student employees (teaching assistants/readers/tutors) UAW2865

*Graduate student researchers SRU-UAW

*Postdoctoral scholars and Academic researchers UAW5810

Image from Fair UC

Workers versus Elites

At the first draft of this article (11-20-22), the union and their bosses, the University of California Regents, were far from a settlement. We expected UC officials to engage in a variety of anti-union strategies despite claims that they were bargaining in good faith. True to form, that's what happened.

Mainstream local media attention has occurred, but few sources have given much thought to the history of politics, academic power, and wealth--and their links to poor labor conditions: long and irregular hours, low-wages, and wage theft at University of California campuses.

Organized workers in the UC system have also had to fight systemic harassment and intimidation, systemic racism, and threats of deportation. In the not-too-distant past, UC workers claimed the UC system spent millions of dollars on union busting firms and employed "activist response teams" that included police officials and administrators to watch striking workers.

Governor Gavin Newsom and the 18 Regents of the UC system represent the major political and economic interests of the State of California--and the adversaries of labor. In this situation they have an enormous amount of power but were mostly invisible to the media.

California History

According to University of California Santa Barbara labor historian Nelson Lichtenstein, about 10 percent of the UC's budget is funded by the State of California, down from more than 50 percent in its peak year, 1963. Other elite universities have replicated this model.

Californians have also experienced growing inequality (including high rents and college tuition) for more than a half century, since the rise of Ronald Reagan (1967-1975) and the movement to reduce taxes and defund higher education.

During Reagan's second term as Governor of California, a 1973 California Supreme Court ruling opened the floodgates for landlords to charge unaffordable rents.

Proposition 13 (1978), which limited residential and commercial property taxes, added insult to injury. And Proposition 209 (1996) was a near fatal blow to equality and social justice in the Golden State.

Labor and the UC System

UAW Local 2865, the union of teaching assistants, graduate student instructors, tutors, and readers in the University of California system was formed in 2000. UAW 5810, the union of postdoctoral scholars and academic researchers, was formed in 2008.

By 2018, UAW 2865 grew to majority membership statewide and won a new contract with new rights in several areas.

In July 2021, the UC system boasted that it had grown to $168 Billion in assets. Four months later, 6,000 UC part-time lecturers prepared to strike for better wages and more stability. Median wages for the contingent lecturers were $19,000 a year. The settlement between the UC system and University Council-American Federation of Teachers (UC-AFT) called for a 30 percent increase in wages over 5 years with promises of more stability.

UAW 2865 has attempted to negotiate with the UC system--who for weeks offered concessions that would not even cover inflation. Worker salaries vary, but some make as little as $24,000 a year, in cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where housing is extremely unaffordable.

Bargaining for a Fair UC document lists worker proposals and UC's proposals.

The 2022 Strike

As the strike has developed, the system has employed a number of tactics, including divide and conquer actions and a number of appeals to the media and the public. We expect the mainstream media to side more with the system it serves rather than the people who do the hardest work but get the lowest pay.

Initially, many senior faculty and other unions serving the University of California refused to cross picket lines in solidarity with the UAW strikers.

Stanford University marching band spells out "UAW" during Stanford-Cal football game on November 19, 2022 at California Memorial Stadium. Image courtesy Rafael Jaime, President of UAW 2865.

Second week of the strike. UC workers at the University of California, San Diego, November 21, 2022

Week 3 of the strike. UC workers at UCLA, November 27, 2022

On November 29th, the UAW 5810 gained a tentative agreement and received significant wage increases for postdocs and academic researchers--12,000 of the 48,000 workers. Meanwhile, the UC system had made no additional concessions to lower status graduate student workers.

On November 30, UC officials made few concessions to the graduate students. Student Researchers United (SRU) and UAW 2865 bargaining teams made major concessions, to include:

Dropping dependent healthcare coverage completely
Dropping the childcare subsidy from $6,000 per quarter to $3,300
Dropping the base wage demand from $54,000 to $43,000

Week 3 letter from UCSC4COLA to UC workers encouraging them to continue and informing them that they can expect pushback from a number of fronts.

Fox News used the UC strike as a reason to attack liberal higher education and labor power, noting the layers of administrative bloat at elite universities, the salaries of tenured professors, and the schools' reliance on foreign students--but using an ahistorial, white supremacist frame.

On December 1, strikers occupied the UC Berkeley Chancellor's Office, leaving the next morning.

On December 2, one thousand UC faculty asked Governor Gavin Newsom to support the academic workers in winning their demands.

Week 4 of the UC Strike (Finals Week). Hundreds of workers in Sacramento and sit-ins at two President's offices, December 5, 2022. That night, police arrested 17 UC protestors in Sacramento, for trespassing.

On December 5, the UK Guardian published an opinion piece by renowned labor historian and University of California, Santa Barbara professor Nelson Lichtenstein calling the UC strike "by far the largest and most important strike in the history of American higher education." That night, 17 protestors were arrested at the University of California President's Office in Sacramento, for trespassing.

On December 6, the UC strike received 6 minutes of attention from the PBS News Hour. UC strikers began planning for a "long-haul" strike and would continue to withhold their labor (grading exams) as finals weeks ends. At least 400 UC Faculty Senate members have also agreed not to break the picket line, leaving more than 30,0000 grades uncompleted.

On December 7, 10 strikers were arrested after entering the office of UC Regent & Chair of the UC Investment Committee Richard Sherman demanding fair contracts.

On Friday December 9, the UAW unions and administrators agreed to mediation. The Associated Press reported that the postdocs and researchers would not return to work until all the bargaining units had gotten an agreement. NBC News (print version) highlighted the effects of the strike on disrupting the university's operations and hurting undergraduates, with the workers struggle buried in the article. Other news outlets framed the story as a disruption causing stress to undergraduates.

In week 5, the number of strikers were reduced as 12,000 postdocs and academic researchers crossed the picket line after reaching an agreement with the Regents the previous week. Remaining strikers, who had received little attention from the Regents, vowed not to stop, preparing for a large event, the Regents Romp, at UCLA on Wednesday, December 14. Workers continued to be arrested as they spoke out about their economic hardships.

On December 16, the graduate student workers reached a Tentative Agreement (TA) with the University of California but remained on the picket line until a new contract was ratified.

On December 23, the strike ended after the agreement with graduate student workers was ratified. According to the LA Times, 68 percent of the graduate student researchers (SRU) voted yes to the agreement, with a vote of 10,057 to 4,640. UAW 2865, the union of teaching assistants, tutors and other student academic workers, approved their agreement with 61.6 voting yes, 11,386 to 7,097. For future workers, the gains were substantial, more than 50 percent over two years. Some workers, however, said the TA did not lift them out of poverty.

Search This Blog

Monday, June 23, 2025

Monday, July 7, 2025

Sunday, June 29, 2025

Monday, July 14, 2025

Tuesday, July 1, 2025

The Missing Shield: Why SNHU Workers Need a Labor Union

Wednesday, April 12, 2023

RU Strike Diary, Day 4

Monday, June 23, 2025

Sunday, November 20, 2022