Faculty unions improve adjunct pay

7/26/2013: From Colleen Flaherty in IHE:

When adjuncts push to unionize, they typically want better pay, better benefits (or any benefits if they don’t have them) and job security. With unionization drives spreading, a key question is: Does collective bargaining yield meaningful gains? 

The results of numerous initial contracts suggest the answer is “Yes.” Negotiations on first contracts can take six months or more, but gains in those contracts frequently include significant pay increases and other, non-financial benefits. 

“[Unionization] does empirically make a difference,” said Adrianna Kezar, professor education at the University of Southern California and director of the Delphi Project to examine and develop the role of adjunct faculty. …

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Faculty unions improve adjunct pay

  1. Not Jim Bean says:

    Nope, do the math. The administration will settle for a 14.5% raise package. Proportionally that’s 0.145. And union dues will be 1.25% of pay. And 0.145 minus 1.25 is a 1.105% *decrease* in take home pay.

    Suckers.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Anonymous says:

      dog says

      while I am sure the above is intentional
      but if 14.5% = .145 then 1.25% = .0125

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Anonymous says:

      “Not Jim Bean” my ass.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. Anon says:

    It’s worse than Jim says. The 14.5% will be a one time increase, while the 1.25% dues have to be paid every year. Compounding annually, this means that within 9 years faculty will be paying every dime of their salary to the union.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Anonymous says:

      I hope no one at the UO gave this dumbass, who has the math skills of a 7-year old, a degree or a job.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Oryx says:

      Deep breaths. I’m sure these are all jokes. A legacy of Bean’s ineptness with percentages is a steady stream of these.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Prof Napier says:

      No, I’ve checked several times with my slide rule. You need to start by taking the log of the percentage changes, then use arcsines, of course.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  3. thundercat says:

    Do the math? Looks like you’re both doing some funny sort of algebraic/linguistic alchemy.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Seriously, I'm not Jim Bean says:

      So help me out on this. What’s their estimate of the effect of unionization on adjunct wages and benefits?

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  4. Anonymous says:

    To ‘help me out’ it really is not a smple answer–other than significantly positive, but small, (2-3 %) on average. why so small? from the paper:It is not clear that unions are able to enhance university revenue through increases in either tuition or for public institutions, state support.
    One could argue might be a bit larger here if we think admin bloat has been larger here than the average?just laying out arguments…
    The paper also makes the obvious point that nonpecuniary benefits (job security, grievance procedures,etc.) may be more important than pecuniary benefits

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>