YUFA
External
Reflections on the CAUT
Conference on Contract Academic Staff,
Ottawa, Jan. 20 – Feb. 1, 2004
Nick Lary and Lélia Young
Jan 04 - “CAUT
believes that excellence in education is best assured through the secure
continuing appointments of career academics. CAUT opposes the increasing
use of casual labour to fulfill ongoing staffing requirements. While there
are legitimate reasons to hire academics on contract, underfunding and
administrative flexibility are not sufficient grounds for hiring contract
academic staff as a substitute for continuing appointments.” (CAUT
Policy Statement on Fairness for Contract Academic Staff, Art. 1)
Contract academic staff
– part-timers, full-time part-timers, contingent faculty – this fluid
category of university teachers started to grow in Ontario universities in
the 1970s as a result of government cutbacks. One early response at York
was the unionization of contract faculty and teaching assistants, under
the auspices first of the Canadian Union of Education Workers and then of
CUPE 3903. The amount of teaching done by members of CUPE 3903 has
supposedly not been measured for several years. When last measured between
40 and 50% of teaching of undergraduates was done by contract faculty and
by graduate students working as TAs.
At American colleges and
universities the trend towards ‘casualisation’ of the academic
workforce was slower at first. By the mid-90s it was marked. According to
the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), full-time
non-tenure track faculty comprised 28% of all full-time faculty by 1998,
while part-time non-tenure-track faculty comprised 40% of all faculty. At
York in 2002-03 the number of contract faculty almost doubled, while the
number of new (non-replacement) faculty hired was 35%.
The rapid growth of
‘contingent’ faculty is changing the face of the academy. The growth
threatens to erode tenure and, with it, the principle of academic freedom.
Since, moreover, contract faculty do not usually contribute to graduate
programs or to service, the workload of full-time faculty increases, while
graduate students suffer owing to the relative scarcity of graduate
faculty. The corporatization of universities means overmanagement, larger
class sizes, casualization of the workforce; and threatens the quality of
education. The postsecondary system is changing rapidly, with a
specialization of functions – either research or teaching –within
particular institutions and a move towards tiering of universities (with
some more research-intensive than others).
In the assessment of
Richard Moser, of the AAUP, the university system and university faculty
are now faced with four interlinking issues: 1) improving the status of
contingent faculty, 2) improving the quality of education, 3) workplace
democracy, and 4) academic freedom. These issues must be addressed as part
of a resistance to the growth of managerial control and corporatization of
the university.
The CAUT conference,
“Negotiating Conditions of Employment for Contract Academic Staff”,
held in Ottawa on the weekend of January 30 – February 1, 2004, was an
attempt, among other things, to take stock of the situation and to stress
the need for faculty associations to take action in defence of their
universities. The conference was well attended. Roughly 1/3 of the
participants were faculty without tenure-stream appointments. Although
YUFA sent two participants, it was unfortunate that CUPE 3903 didn't sent
anybody. With well-advertised sessions on such topics as varieties of
Contract Academic Staff (CAS), strategies for changing the nature of an
appointment, and the politics of negotiation, the conference should have
been of interest to our own contract faculty. (Fortunately many of the
papers and materials of the conference are available.)
Hypocrisy of university administrations
A number of myths stand
in the way of improving the situation of contingent faculty. One pretence
is that contract teaching is just a
career phase. In fact it turns out to be a career path for many
academic staff. Universities squeeze tenure-stream appointments, while
they increase appointments of CAS. And universities are often reluctant to
hire someone from the contract stream to a tenure-stream appointment that
is posted.
Another pretence: teaching
and research remain indelibly linked. There are two sides to this
claim. On one hand, even with the growth of the non-tenure-stream faculty,
teaching is supposedly done by people fresh out of graduate school, for
whom teaching will be closely linked to their research. (But this is not
true, since the bulk of people who are CAS are in this category for an
extended period of their lives.) On the other hand, university
administrations are deliberately creating structures in which a great part
of (the bulk of?) the teaching is done by cheap academic labour, while
research is performed by a few well-paid scholars.
Maureen Shaw, from
Kwantlen University College, pointedly suggested, “the Employer would
prefer an undercompensated, undereducated workforce.” In other words,
the Employer expects that there will be academic staff who do not do
research, whose main function is to do the teaching work. Correlatively,
she suggested, “perhaps there should be two tiers of tuition”
(depending on who is teaching the class). But many contract academic staff
would object that they are highly educated (as well educated as many
tenure-stream faculty), and that against all odds they manage to do
research. (And in this connection it should be noted that the latest CUPE
3903 Collective Agreement gives contract faculty some access to research
monies.)
Where does York fall? Is it on the brink?
York’s tenure-stream
faculty complement in relation to student numbers is one of the worst in
the province and in the country. In the double cohort years it has been
allowed to erode even further. If, according to counts made four or five
years ago, more than 40% of the teaching was done by contract faculty,
then, presumably, with the recent huge increase in the number of contract
faculty, the figures now are even more dismal. (Some universities have
negotiated limits of 30%.)
What can change? What can York faculty do?
Insist on
negotiating tenure-stream faculty complement. This must be a priority for
YUFA. The Administration has refused to negotiate complement. Other
universities have succeeded in negotiating complement.
Insist that a
course that has been taught for a number of years by contract faculty
become a tenure-stream position (given that it has proved that it is a
necessary part of the curriculum).
Negotiate a limit
on total teaching done by contract faculty. Other universities have shown
the way.
Persuade the two
faculty associations (YUFA and CUPE 3903) take responsibility for one
another (and for the University, since the Administration will not do so).
Perhaps the time has even come to reconsider the necessity for existing as
two separate unions. (It may serve the interests of the Administration to
have two separate unions.) According to Doug Lorimer, of Wilfrid Laurier
University, at the conference, the best results have been obtained at
universities with a single union for all teaching faculty.
Insist on
maintaining conversions (the Employer wants to get rid of them). We have
had a number of fine and even outstanding conversions. Some years spent in
contract teaching should not be a disqualification for a tenure-stream
appointment. Contract teaching must have career prospects. It must not be
a dead end.
Ensure that the
faculty associations take responsibility for faculty that have been
exploited. This is a matter of equity. Our own institution rests on
exploited labour. Exploited labour must be eliminated, while a measure of
redress is owed to those that have been exploited. The pool of contract
faculty eligible for Special Renewable Contracts (SRCs) established some
years ago was an attempt to address this question. No doubt there is a new
‘pool’ of faculty who meet the same criteria. This is a matter that
should concern both unions, and all equity committees.
Learn to read budgets
and plans! Faculty associations must understand what the
Administration is attempting to get away with in its budget and planning
exercises.
A Word to Senate:
The responsibility for academic policy is meant
to reside with Senate.
And finally: consolidate
alliances within the academic community. We have two faculty unions
(and other unions with concerned members); we have undergraduate students
and graduate students and also parents who are concerned for the
well-being of this university.
********************
Lélia Young adds:
1.
CUPE 3903 gets research leave but a) it is unpaid, and b) is
granted only after the accumulation of a certain number of years and
course credits.
2.
The number of conversions should be raised to 10 per year in order
to address the problem of professional inequity.
3.
SRCs
do not give tenure to qualified academic staff with Ph.D.s. Some
people with SRCs are not covered until the normal retirement age. From the
standpoint of the Administration, they are a cheap pool of labour. SRCs
result in a different kind of exploitation.
4.
After four
years of contractual employment, a department should offer a tenure-stream
appointment to an academic staff member it wishes to keep.