Unless an agreement can be reached between the University of California and the United Auto Workers Local 2685 union, students may soon come to class to discover their TAs have gone on strike.
The union, which also represents UC tutors and readers, previously went on strike in 2003, leaving students without discussion sections shortly before finals.
Once negotiated, members received a 1.5 percent pay increase and workload protections in a deal that expired last fall, when new threats of strikes emerged.
“Teaching assistants perform tasks that are important to students and to UCLA’s mission … and the university values those contributions,” said UCLA spokesman Phil Hampton.
Its hard to imagine a UCLA without TAs. After all, who would grade all those papers and exams? Students would lose individual attention and miss out on supplemental instruction, sending ripples through all levels of UC bureaucracy.
When evaluating strikes, we must look beyond the short-term inconveniences and judge them based on whether it will mean valuable, long-term progress for employees in a way that is financially feasible for employers.
The union is currently pushing for more expansive fee remission programs, improved health care (they compare the current system to that of Wal-Mart) and better accommodations for TAs with families.
Like many other workers, TAs are undoubtedly underpaid for their long hours of work. While I can understand the need for such improvements, the UC is wise to hold back in giving into all the union’s demands.
Though they probably expect to compromise their agenda in negotiations, I can’t help but feel the UAW is asking for things that just aren’t feasible in a public university system that is already strapped for cash.
According to a UAW press release, the union is frustrated that UC TAs make about $7,780 less annually than their counterparts; the difference at UCLA is $6,081.
The difference is a shame, but should hardly come as a surprise considering that comparable private universities are funded differently and often feature much larger endowments than UC schools.
Even professors, for example, are paid more at private institutions by almost $20,000.
Although a pay raise may be in order, expecting the UC to match or come close to this salary seems unreasonable given current budget conditions.
The UAW is also fighting for a program that would remit fees for nonresident students from other states and countries. They cite dropping enrollment and the inability to compete with other universities on this front as the primary reasons.
Aside from being very costly, these programs would place such students above other undergraduate and professional students who would still have to pay nonresident fees.
Residents contribute thousands in taxes in order to attend UC campuses at a reduced cost ““ a sacrifice nonresident students won’t have made.
To increase this type of diversity, the UC should work to establish more private fellowships and scholarships for nonresidents. Rather than just making the price tag cheaper, it will add prestige to the positions.
Despite some shortcomings, the union also makes some requests that are highly merited, such as better policies for TAs that are parents.
The UC expects parents to maintain the same schedule of TA requirements despite the additional obligations. Nursing stations and parent-friendly services are scarce. If they leave school, their dependent health care coverage is terminated.
Considering the unique needs of these students that are so common to those in their age bracket, it seems only fair that at the minimum, the UC provide these services to them.
In the end, neither group may receive the benefits that they were originally looking for. Students may even miss class.
But achieving a healthy balance between employer and employee will ensure the continued productivity and success of the UC system.
E-mail Noble at bnoble@media.ucla.edu.