51–60 of 194 posts
It was a disaster at Wisconsin. Union favored the 8th year humanities students at the expense of the 1 and 2 year STEM students, and traded cash for benefits that really only affected people with families. Stipends were the lowest in the country among major research universities, and the union refused to let wages rise for in-demand TAs, so a bunch of them went off and got private sector jobs instead, limiting the si…
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!
What the GP said was that instead of taking a cash option that would benefit all members, they chose benefits that only benefitted parents. It's reasonable to be angry that an alternative that would benefit all members wasn't chosen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> who have less options than them. So the humanities folks' priority is sculpting a union program to their specific needs. That also doesn't sound very "fight for the allowance of your peers". That's democracy though. Doesn't mean the right choice is made but that the voters pull the strings.
I think it is objectively the right choice to enable people to build families if they're going to be in a program until their late 20s! This sounds ridiculous to me on its face-- why the hell wouldn't you support your maximally educated populace (getting doctorates) to have families? The 1st and 2nd year STEM kids (literally kids-- you can enter into a masters fresh out of college, so like 21-23 yrs old) who see the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> who have less options than them. So the humanities folks' priority is sculpting a union program to their specific needs. That also doesn't sound very "fight for the allowance of your peers". That's democracy though. Doesn't mean the right choice is made but that the voters pull the strings.
I think it is objectively the right choice to enable people to build families if they're going to be in a program until their late 20s! This sounds ridiculous to me on its face-- why the hell wouldn't you support your maximally educated populace (getting doctorates) to have families? The 1st and 2nd year STEM kids (literally kids-- you can enter into a masters fresh out of college, so like 21-23 yrs old) who see the…
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.
[flagged]
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.
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.
[flagged]
Are graduate students employees in the USA? I know in Europe there are universities where that is the case.
Generally, no, universities classify graduate students as students, not employees. Stanford additionally classifies postdocs as students and charges their funding source a nominal tuition fee. > A Stanford postdoctoral scholar is a non-matriculated trainee, in graduate student status, in residence at Stanford University pursuing advanced studies beyond the doctoral level in preparation for an independent career. This…
Is this normal in the USA? In New Zealand postdocs are employees (usually on short or medium term contracts that align with funding grants).
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.
[flagged]
To use an analogy to the trades, the PhD students are the apprentices, the senior researchers / professors are the journeymen. Do not misunderstand, the PhD students are doing labor for the benefit of the university, and getting paid to do so. The problem arises from uninformed people who ask exactly your question, operating on the misguided assumption that graduate school is just more, harder undergraduate school.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A first step, maybe, but far from enough to fix it. Toxic: That won't be fixed until they start firing tenured profs for abusing grad students. Nothing else will do. Broken: There's no route to professorship for most grad students, ever. We either need far bigger universities, or far fewer grad students.
Or permanent positions that are reasonably paid and not professors. Like teachers, researchers, ... I don't get the impression that everyone becomes a manager in software, not everyone becomes a line manager in a factory. Not every wants to become CEO eventually. Why should academia be any different? In Germany for one we used to have positions at universities that focused exclusively on teaching. That was, like, the…