Student workers should be wary of union’s motives

There has been a recent effort to incorporate the Associated Students UCLA student workers into the union representing full-time (non-student) workers.

Proponents of the unionization plan recently presented their demands at an ASUCLA executive board meeting. Throughout the presentation, advocates repeated the claim that a union would give students more rights in the workplace.

“Students deserve a voice, benefits ““ we deserve a union,” said Cassandra Lopez, a fifth-year Chicana and Chicano studies student at the presentation.

But the effort seems to be more about pushing a radical pro-union ideology than benefiting student workers, as it seems the union will be the only party sure to gain.

At the meeting, union representative Mirna E. Martinez demanded that students be incorporated into her organization.

“Don’t discriminate against the workers that are also students. They do the same work as we do and deserve the same respect that we get,” Martinez said through a translator.

But there was little discussion of whether most ASUCLA workers actually want to join the union, considering the cost of unionization for student workers would be necessarily high.

Union advocates demand that student workers be paid the same $9.60 an hour paid to full-time ASUCLA workers, and claim that students are currently receiving a lower wage for the same job. But full-time and part-time jobs are not comparable; full-time workers typically receive higher pay and more benefits than similar workers who work part-time.

On the other hand, workers would have to pay union fees, which are often around $20 a month, but are many times considerably higher. If students were to join the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 3299 ““ which is the proposal ““ all ASUCLA student workers would have to pay union fees, regardless of whether they decide to join.

For most workers, these costs would outweigh the benefits, many of which are political and intangible, such as “a voice in the workplace.” While it sounds important, the term is virtually meaningless in practice, particularly for student workers who work part-time.

The whole unionization effort is tied to the radical Student Worker Front, which reveals something about the motivation for this campaign; this group has sided with unions on every issue and exists solely to advocate for unions.

Students involved in this group would push for unionization even if it would benefit few student workers.

This ideology can be seen in the unrealistic demands of the organizers; among other demands, the union advocates bemoaned the increasing cost ofeducation and asked that ASUCLA help its workers offset their education costs.

Union or no union, ASUCLA is not likely to turn these thousands of jobs into scholarships. There is no shortage of students willing to take these jobs, based on their convenience and relatively good pay.

Such a scheme would undoubtedly increase the prices for ASUCLA services paid by all students. This inconvenient fact is neglected by the proponents of unionization.

As a special interest group, unions often benefit some people at the expense of others. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with some people joining together to grab some benefits for themselves, unions are unusual in their attempts to persuade us that lobbying for their own self-interests is central to a greater fight for justice.

Given the unrealistic demands of this proposed union, it’s unlikely that most students would be willing to part with the monthly union fees for these unattainable benefits.

It’s no surprise, then, that there has been no push to poll workers as to their support of the idea before presenting this proposal to the ASUCLA board. At this point, there is no evidence that any more student workers than the 50 who attended the presentation support the effort.

Union representatives and a student union organizer did not return calls seeking comment.

At the least, this idea should be put to a vote where student workers can gauge the benefits they would receive from unionization against its costs and democratically determine whether unionization is a good idea for ASUCLA student workers. And no worker should be compelled to pay union dues involuntarily.

For student workers to be deprived of their earnings ““ based on the demands of a small number of radicals acting out their union-organizing fetishes ““ would be a grave injustice.

E-mail Lazar at dlazar@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *