Saturday, February 11, 2006

On Strike For Respect!

At one point late in the GSC Community Meeting Wednesday night, Dean Katherine Stimpson inserted herself onto the line for the microphone and proceeded to lecture the assembled striking graduate teachers and researchers on the nature of respect and the need for mutual respect in the Graduate School of Arts and Science. (This reminded me of the clause in the Yale Undergraduate Relations based upon which Thomas Frampton orchestrated the filing of 77 undergraduate complaints against President Richard Levin during the buildup to the 2003 strikes, in which we charged that Levin had, by curbing free speech rights and concducting vicious campaigns against the unions, violated the requirement that faculty and administrators preserve "mutual respect and charitable relations".) Anyway, Dean Stimpson was met with incredulity at the ignorance and arrogance she displayed in presuming to lecture hundreds of strikers who have been threatened, patronized, insulted, and referred to by our univeristy president as a "virus" on appropriate decorum. And rightly so. What she said was absolutely ridiculous, given the ways in which the administration has conducted itself since this summer. But it seems to me that on one matter, at least, Dean Stimpson is correct. What's at stake here is all about respect.

re·spect:

1.A feeling of appreciative, often deferential regard; esteem. See Synonyms at regard.
2.The state of being regarded with honor or esteem.
3.Willingness to show consideration or appreciation.
[Dictionary.com]


Graduate teachers at NYU work hard. Folks regularly work over 4o hours a week for low pay and with no job security. We're casualized, transient academics who've come to grad school because we care about the future of teaching, of the university, of cities, of the planet, because we care about social justice and we care about our students. The administration's rhetoric and actions since I have been here have vacillated between constructting us as bawling infants and as vicious and deluded terrorist viruses determined to destroy all that is holy/profitable. The administration has threatened us with the specter of deportation. They've insulted us on a daily basis, discounting the work that we do. They've tried to sew fractious divisions between us and our faculty, between us and our colleagues, between us and our students. They've blacklisted us from our work and then had the temerity to offer us loans in case their lockout should place us in financial hardship. They have refused to speak to us as the organized agent of graduate teachers, instead attemting to slur us by constantly associating us with base and dirty "auto workers" (gasp!) who cannot possibly have any place in academe. They've attempted to exclude us from all decisionmaking about the future of our work and our departments. They've turned our universities into neoliberal playgrounds/investment machines, and turned our classrooms into precarious and exploitative sites of flexible accumulation.

And then they try to lecture us about respect?

We know all about respect. Over the 95 days of this strike we've formed a deep and powerful respect for each other, for other workers on campus and our colleagues at other universities whose continued support has been incredible, for faculty governance, academic job security, and the people in the city we live and work in who have supported us and stood with us in the freezing cold to help build a new, better kind of university without university leadership teams and apparently inebriated ex-feminists who think it's ok to lecture the people they are blacklisting about mutual respect. Respect is what they are trying to strip from us. It's what we are fighting for.

It's what we are going to win.

8 comments:

  1. ad hominem here. i've decided to lay off the insults for today, since the storm is coming and all.
    i can't be sure, but you strike me as someone who has never TA's or GA'd a day in his life.
    you are right, we do work hard. BUT many of us love it. Having worked as a TA for the past few years I can say that I thoroughly enjoy teaching, I have enjoyed it more than any other job I have ever had in life (except for when i was an ice-cream salesperson by the lake as a teenager. i ate so much ice cream and watched free concerts in the park while high as kite. that definitely rivals teaching, but you can't do that forever.

    "we work hard" is such a whiney george w bush approach to the situation.

    there are many other, much more compelling reasons to have a graduate student union on campus.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You're correct. I have never TA'd a course at NYU. I have taught in classrooms at middle and high school levels and enjoy teaching as well.

    I think you're misreading my point. I am not arguing that graduate teachers and researchers should have a union because we work hard. (Point taken regarding the similarities to GWB's catchphrase in the 1st debate with Kerry.) I don't really feel justified to point out why we need a union. What TAs and researchers do is work, regardless of what the Bush administration says and the NYU administration parrots. I take that as a given, and i don't think how hard we work alters the fundamental nature of the work that we do. I'm actually not quite sure why i included that sentence. Maybe it was a subconscious nod to Donna Summer or something.

    There's also the fact that we already have a graduate employee union on this campus and have for years, and I don't think that the administration's constant and solipsistic clatter to the effect of "we're past them, we've moved on" can mask the fact that said union is very much a continued presence and will be regardless of how and when the strike concludes.

    But as for reasons why i'm a part of the movement for the organization of casualized academic workers - I want to help build a university that is diverse, that's open, that's democratic rather than panoptical, that sees teaching and teachers as invaluable rather than exploitable, where international students aren't threatened and intimidated when they try to get recognition for the work that they do and their indispendible presence here, where graduate researchers have a say in the research that they do and its uses and earnings, and where job security and full-time employment are more than phantasmic ephemera. Or ephemeral phantasms. And that's just for starters.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ok. i understand and thank you for your long response.
    first, you're right , the union has been on campus for about 6 years, but for its entire life has been plagued by many of the problems it is facing now ( pro-labor friends of mine mentioned this to me when I got here, right after it was formed, when things were, politically at least, as dandy as can be) But the times are--rather have been- a changin'.
    You all just need to let go of the dream for now, work on it on the DL and come back strong when there is actually a chance that we can "win" ( and here I am using gsoc's implied definition of a win--meaning that the admin will sit down and bargain with a union they recognize, though only the terms of the gsoc leadership. it's actually quite a shame that GSOC refuses to engage the debate--yes, there is a debate--about what "winning" could look like)

    I've heard the diversity and accessibility argument so many times. it's nice. but empty, and actually offensive to some. in an ideal world, where a corporation actually cares about diversity and accessibility for it's inherent goodness-and not it's image, or quotas, or appeasing a liberal contingent of its work force or management--i would take you seriously on that point.
    But we live in the United States of Americe, in the year 2005.
    a private university in this country will never be diverse or accessible. that is the NATURE OF A PRIVATE UNIVERSITY. To be exclusive.
    if diversity is what you want cuny is probably the place to be around here. But how would that look on your CV..not many SUPASTAAHS at CUNY are there. not to mention resources, which is what NYU's money can buy.

    and please, just speak on your own behalf. International students and students of colour can actually stand to benefit from some of the insulting, paternalistic, token-izing gestures of the administration . they probably do better there than with GSOC who has no reason to care. If you could only see the way you all look to outsiders...: sad.

    ReplyDelete
  4. to be clear: why be condescended to and patronized and insulted and used by gsoc for NUTHIN when you can at least get a little $$, or at leat connections, by enduring it from the university?
    now before you say anything about dignity, pride or any such drivel put your critical race-thinking cap on, squeeze your eyes shut and think real hard...

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm happy to talk about different ways of organizing and talk about what winning could look like.

    I disagree with you on your comment about private universities, which make billions of dollars annually in tax relief, NSF/NIH funding, and corporate licenscing partnerships precipitated and made possible only by the Bayh-Dole Act's neoliberal reworking of intellectual property laws which gave ostensibly non-profit institutions the right to reap in huge amounts of money by acting as subcontracted R&D for big pharma and biotech.

    These corporations aren't really very private. They have a responsibility to all of us that they have failed miserably, which is why i think academic unions are necessary.

    If you really think you can get more out of the administration by kissing ass and being insulted and used and degraded for x years, you may be in for a shock come time to enter the job market when it's post-docs and PTAI positions as far as the eye can see. There's a crisis all the "connections" in the world will not fix, and it's why we need unions.

    I wasn't trying to speak for anyone other than myself. If GSOC has historically been not what it needs to be on placing the issues of international students and people of color at the forefront of its organizing, then I have a problem with that. I'm not really interested in doing organizing that doesn't engage in some way that's productive with critical race theory. I think these issues are fundamental to the kind of university i would like to build and fundamental to the survival and future of the labor movement, which you may or may not care about when you aren't making bizarre jabs at eight year old amazon.com reviews.

    ReplyDelete
  6. OK-so how else might "winning" look to you? i would love to hear your answer, as every other gsoc adherent i have spoken to on this topic says winning means having the administration recognize (uaw and all) and bargain in good faith. period.

    also, you seem like a pretty intelligent, or at least well-read, guy: are you telling me you really trust the analytical and descision-making skills of people currently heading up and speaking for "your" union? they are a shocklingly dumb bunch. and their followers--yes, that's what you are, not organizers or whatever you want to call yourselves- seem even dumber.
    why haven't you all taken them to task???

    ReplyDelete
  7. First I'm a detatched idiot.

    Then i'm intelligent. then i'm even dumber than the shockingly dumb bunch.

    Then i'm not treating the anonymous commenters on my non-anonynmous blog who lob insults at me well enough.

    Please.

    I'll post a more substantive response to your first question later, but please, please, please...

    Get over yourself, just a little bit. Maybe?

    ReplyDelete
  8. a little hot under the collar, mr z s-w? sorry, i'll be a little less hurtful, i know it's hard...
    yes, i did say you are a detached idiot. i stand by that.
    i also said you "seemed" intelligent, and that people going along with gsoc now "seem" dumber than the shockingly dumb bunch. I can't be sure, since I don't know you, or all of them, personally.

    the rest of the stuff you just don't get. i should have remembered, you weren't to quick on the uptake re: anon verbose's subtleties either.

    i'll lay off then. i'm no bully.

    ReplyDelete