Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 194 posts

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#111

Post by rnk »

hedora wrote: post #98
ASpring wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was great for us at UC Santa Cruz. The reason I had healthcare during grad school was because the union won it right before I joined. The reason they have a housing stipend now (in the most expensive rental market in the US[1]) is because the union fought for a cost-of-living allowance. We at UCSC didn't always agree with the course of the larger UAW 2685 but they did a lot for us. I'm not sure what the system was…

When was this? Just before the pandemic, the grad students protested at UAW meetings and went on a wildcat strike after UAW ratified a contract the campus voted against. Later, Janet Nepolitano released police drones and set up barricades to try to shut down the picket lines. Eventually covid ended the drama, but only after some students were deported (I assume. The plan was to deport them, but the story stopped maki…

Female problems? Are you serious, that is a pretty negative way to describe health issues that might apply only to women. Why would you put it that way, it's just kind of dismissive.

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#112

Post by e63f67dd-065b »

fruffy wrote: post #30

A big part of the reason these unionization efforts are happening: https://csstipendrankings.org/ Many universities are not paying a living wage for the area they are located in.

The numbers for the MIT living wage calculator are completely wrong for most PhD students. For one, they include thing like social security taxes, which students do not pay. They overestimate medical costs, because most PhD students are young and will not have health complications that drive costs. The rent estimate is based on single-occupancy units, which doesn't make sense because most live with roommates (https://livingwage.mit.edu/resources/Living-Wage-Users-Guide...). Students often qualify for benefits that are not included in the estimate.

It's a popular number to use, but is often quite an overestimate.

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#113

Post by supernova87a »

pkoird wrote: post #97
supernova87a wrote: post #72

When given the opportunity, few people will vote against something that gives them more money. But whether their self-interest is in the broader interest is rarely solved for by such a mechanism. What will happen is that given a finite pot of money, fewer grad students will be taken on by the university's PhD programs, so that the ones who voted for this can get paid more. I'm not sure that's the right choice.

Maybe stop paying the bloated management so much and put money where mouth is.

I agree with that. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#114

Post by shagie »

lapcat wrote: post #108
shagie wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Wisconsin politics and with the context of unions, 2011 was a very memorable year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_Act_10 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_protests If you were a STEM major graduating in 2009 or 2010, you went to grad school for a year or two and got a masters to wait out the recession. In 2011, grad school was made much worse as the union for grad students was severely…

> In Wisconsin politics and with the context of unions, 2011 was a very memorable year. I'm confused about the nature of your reply. You're more or less repeating what I already said in an earlier comment: "Scott Walker was a major union buster who spurred massive protests at the Wisconsin State Capitol in 2011 and a recall election" To be clear, I'm a Wisconsinite and a former member of the TAA.

I suspect we're in agreement then. My comment was intended supporting material to your claim that the reason people left wasn't the wins by the TAA that became part of the 2010 benefits for domestic partners for state employees but rather that they were done procrastinating entering the job market.

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#115

Post by shard »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #110
dayvid wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I volunteer taught at a high school for a few months in Milwaukee when Scott Walker was in power. A lot of poor kids were bused to this school in a nicer neighborhood and couldn't do sports or extracurriculars because Walker cut funding for extra school buses to come later.

Such a weird concept, I could never understand it. Why not spend effort making their local neighborhoods and schools better? Everybody grew up with richer and "better" schools and areas, I would have hated being sent out to those.

Likely a matter of the parents in richer neighborhoods being able to donate more time and money to the local school than in poorer neighborhoods. The buildings are better, there are more resources available to teachers, more extra-curricular activities, skilled teachers fight to be posted there. Certainly things can be improved at schools in poorer neighborhoods, but I doubt it could be equalized to the point where kids won't benefit from being bussed to the richer neighborhood schools.

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#116

Post by tessierashpool »

hedora wrote: post #98
ASpring wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was great for us at UC Santa Cruz. The reason I had healthcare during grad school was because the union won it right before I joined. The reason they have a housing stipend now (in the most expensive rental market in the US[1]) is because the union fought for a cost-of-living allowance. We at UCSC didn't always agree with the course of the larger UAW 2685 but they did a lot for us. I'm not sure what the system was…

When was this? Just before the pandemic, the grad students protested at UAW meetings and went on a wildcat strike after UAW ratified a contract the campus voted against. Later, Janet Nepolitano released police drones and set up barricades to try to shut down the picket lines. Eventually covid ended the drama, but only after some students were deported (I assume. The plan was to deport them, but the story stopped maki…

[flagged]

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#117

Post by supertrope »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #110
dayvid wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I volunteer taught at a high school for a few months in Milwaukee when Scott Walker was in power. A lot of poor kids were bused to this school in a nicer neighborhood and couldn't do sports or extracurriculars because Walker cut funding for extra school buses to come later.

Such a weird concept, I could never understand it. Why not spend effort making their local neighborhoods and schools better? Everybody grew up with richer and "better" schools and areas, I would have hated being sent out to those.

Before a child sets foot in kindergarten many inputs have already been happened. Did their mother abuse alcohol or drugs during the pregnancy? Does their household have domestic violence? Did their parents read to them on a regular basis? Did their parents teach them how to interact with other kids? Were their parents able to pass along the English language?

A school is not just faculty and a building. While public schools will enroll any resident children their parents must be able to afford the area. This has a high correlation with the average quality of students at the time of enrollment. The selection effect is the most powerful force in educational institutions. Parental involvement can vary from helicopter parents down to parent teacher conferences that are a ghost town because the crowd of parents is stuck at their second job or they decided they have better things to do.

Transforming an under-performing school district or neighborhood takes many years and is far beyond the capability of a single person. Calling the police on drug dealers carries personal risk.

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#118

Post by seanmcdirmid »

EatingWithForks wrote: post #34
CraigRo wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Caused huge attrition of the 1st and 2nd year stem students (i.e. quit with a masters). The union was dominated by humanities students, and they fought for what they wanted, not what the overall membership wanted. Very few STEM folks had any interest in being part of the union, but because so many voted with their feet, it was hopeless to set up a decertifiying petition.

TBH the way you explain it sounds to me like 1st and 2nd year stem students were disengaged and uninterested in solidarity with their academic peers who have less options than them. I'm not even particularly fond of the humanities I just don't understand why you wouldn't fight for the allowance for your peers to start families, god damn!

STEM grad students often have much bigger stipends than humanities grad students given that STEM is more well funded. It sounds like the union simply equalized things, although I’m not sure how that would work with DARPA or similar funding agencies, since RA salaries are taken out of grants (maybe just raise overhead to redistribute more funding to humanities, but grants have caps on overhead as well), so maybe just apply it to TA wages (then anyone in STEM would need to RA and avoid being a TA)? Anyways, it doesn’t take a leap to see how stipend equalization at a university would make it less appealing to those who would get less and more appealing to those who would get more.

It is a zero sum problem, unfortunately.

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#119

Post by BenFranklin100 »

mjhay wrote: post #55
supernova87a wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You obviously have absolutely no clue how research PhDs work. Most PhD students are pretty much done with classes after the first year or two. They get their PhDs through research (often writing their own grants) or the vital function of teaching. They are workers. It is disingenuous to view them as students. If PhD students were not able to make a living, very, very few people would ever be able to enter science.

As someone who also spent six years in grad school, I’m entitled to say grad students are generally remarkably unproductive. Much of their ‘research’ work after the 2-3 years of classes is best considered continuing education. Most of them suck as TAs too. They don’t need to make a living either - They just need to get by for 5 years by living with roommates and eating ramen. It’s what I did.

(And it’s not true grad students ‘often’ write their own successful grants. The vast majority of STEM grad students are supported on stipends from their advisor’s research grants or do a TA-ship when desperate.)

Re: Stanford Graduate Students Won Their Union Vote

#120

Post by weakfish »

ETH_start wrote: post #82
Atreiden wrote: post #7

Good for them! Academia is a toxic and broken environment, and this seems like a great first step in fixing it. Interested to see how the dynamic plays out at Stanford, and if other American universities follow suit.

[flagged]

Source?
Post reply on HN