Earlier this week I had the opportunity to attend the U.S. Department of Education's Forum on Fostering Persistence and Degree Attainment, which was held at the Community College of Philadelphia, where I teach as a part-time faculty member.   As Barbara reported, I wasn't able to be on the panel.  The panel was totally made up of college administrators, with the exception of Larry Gold, director of AFT higher education.  I was the lone faculty member in the back of the room, an interesting position in which to be.  The goal of my attendance at this meeting was to help promote the idea that academic staffing ought to be a consideration as the federal government considers how to distribute the money going to the College Access and Completion Fund for staffing.  The fund is a 5-year, mandatory $2.5 billion investment in improving degree attainment rates in higher education.

When given the opportunity, though persistent hand-raising, I spoke about how the best way to achieve student persistence was through engaging faculty, giving them positive reinforcement, perhaps even creating a pool of money for contingent faculty to engage students and contribute to college life (through office hours, advising, committee work).  If some contingent faculty are willing, they should be asked to and paid to participate.  This will engage more and more students.

Colleges across the country are committing consumer fraud.  They are packaging the campuses with attractive buildings and technology, and pouring money into the trappings to lure students and their parents to their campuses.  College boards and administrators are only able to pull this off because they have a "dirty little secret."  That secret is that the faculty who are actually responsible for educating these students are underpaid part-time faculty and overworked full-time faculty.  Therefore, at many public institutions, no matter how nice the campus looks to consumers, they are being sold a bill of goods.  The average consumer assumes that what you see, you get.   At the grocery store, a smart shopper reads the ingredients, looks at the cost per oz. for an item that costs just a few dollars.  Why then should consumers spend thousands of dollars without knowing what they are getting?  The packaging might be nice, but a consumer doesn't buy soup because it has a pretty label.  As faculty in-the-know, we have an obligation to report this fraud to the public, most of whom will never think to ask the question.

It is time for legislation that would require colleges to report their ratios on a regular basis, the way they report campus/city crime statistics.  AFT lobbied for this reporting in the last reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, but the institutional associations opposed this reporting, knowing how bad the truth would make them look.  We need reporting not just of numbers of full-time and contingent faculty, but the percentages of undergraduate courses taught by these two groups, which will tell the real story about the lack of concern the colleges have about investing in the students once their tuition bill is paid.  We also need to have reporting of faculty salaries, especially underpaid part-time faculty salaries, so the public will realize how undervalued these faculty must feel as they teach their students.   Consumer fraud is a crime after all, and these colleges are robbing the public blind, taking thousands of their dollars and delivering a package that contains less each year.

Recently, the Part-time and Visiting Lecturer (PT/VL) members of the Faculty and Staff Federation at Community College of Philadelphia conducted a membership drive in which we called all the PT/VL non-members.  We used the issues surrounding the FACE legislation as a conversation starter, asking if pay, benefits or a full-time position was most important to them.  Then we informed the non-members about bonus money that the Federation fought for in the last round of negotiations, to remind them of how the Federation has been working on their behalf.  Finally, and notably last, we asked if they wished to join the Federation.  

The results were successful.  About half of those we were able to reach on the phone agreed to join.  Non-members with whom I spoke were happy to have their opinion counted in our FACE survey and appreciated the Federation taking the time to call them.  By contacting all of the non-members, we were also able to update our records with phone numbers, drop the non-members who had left the College, and get an accurate count of our actual non-members.  The members who volunteered to call, about ten in all, enjoyed themselves during the two-hour pizza party/membership drive.  It was a positive feeling for everyone to see real results from their efforts.  There was a nice spirit of camaraderie among the part-time faculty members who made the calls, which is clearly valuable and rare with a population that does not often interact.

Within two hours, we recruited new members, began to spread the word about FACE, collected information, and built rapport and activism among members.  Head on over the jump to see the phone script we used in case you wish to adapt it for use at your local.

“The right thing to do” is a concept easily overlooked with college administrations that have become as focused on the bottom line as the society they serve. This moral compass seems like an outmoded concept now, easily shucked off for the more readily available “the quickest thing,” “the most convenient thing,” “the cheapest thing,” or “the easiest thing.”

The inherent worth in “the right thing to do,” however, is that it helps people other than you, gives them a leg up and promotes a sense of fairness. But many times, it has negative fallout, especially today, given the automatic backlash to those who do not follow the party line in higher education. Too often, those faculty who do “the right thing”—whether it is a lone individual or group—those who stand up for the good of the other faculty is a problem, a troublemaker. The result is to silence people from speaking up since most people do not want to stand out or be labeled. To me, and to other union leaders whom I respect, it is a badge of honor to be the one to rise up and declare, “It’s not right.”

I have taught part-time for almost ten years.  I have taught about 100 Composition classes at the Community College level, and some literature courses.  Approximately 2500 students have passed though my classes.  Not one student has ever entered the English Department with a complaint.  I have had groups of students take my next Composition class.  We have laughed, argued, learned and grown together.  None of this matters.  None of this counts. 

Why?  I am at a new Community College.  I am on probation for my first few years.  I am the lowest ranking Instructor and will be for some time.  I have the least seniority and get the last choice in classes.

I am there because the college has a strong union, with better pay and benefits.  But I’m tired, of starting over, tired of being held up to the administration’s probationary requirements and offered the least convenient schedule, having the least protection.  I put in my time for ten years, taking those last minute classes, the sections at the faraway campus, the weekend or evening courses that I had to sacrifice family time to teach. 

I’ve done them.  I’m done with them.

Congratulations to Washington State AFT on getting the Senate’s budget to include $500,000 for conversion efforts at community colleges.  As we lay the groundwork in PA to get our bill passed in the next year, it is encouraging to see some success.  I was disappointed, though not terribly surprised, to see that the Washington legislators had dropped the directive for priority to be given to part-time instructors when these jobs are filled.  There is always reluctance to control local decisions from above. 

I can see this priority directive being a problem in other state legislatures too.  This priority is something that AFT will continue to fight for. What better candidate for a position than someone who has already proven their committment to the college? 

However, there is something else AFT's model FACE legislation includes, something that each state's FACE bill needs to include, job protection for the part-time faculty.  Looking to the future, as the ratio of full-time faculty inches towards its 75% goal, the fear expressed from most part-time faculty is job loss.  Some part-time teachers do not want full-time positions; however, they all want to keep their jobs.

Editor's Note: Please welcome Jennie Smith from Philadelphia Community College to FACE Talk as our newest contributor. As you can see from her first post, she is a committed contingent faculty member activist who is working hard on staffing issues and we are glad to have her perspective and contributions.

____________________________________

At a time in PA when we have FACE bills introduced in the House and Senate and are hopefully poised to get some legislation passed, I am dismayed at the lack of solidarity among higher education’s part-time and full-time faculty. We are ready to make some real progress with this legislation, and in-fighting is not going to help our cause. We need to be the “union” that we profess to be. Part-time faculty deserve parity, but we also need to demand that more full-time faculty positions be created. Let’s not advocate giving up an obvious gain to our faculty; that’s the administration’s usual stance—not the union’s.

I am a part-time faculty member and have been involved in the parity movement from its inception in PA. I was an organizer of the part-time faculty at Bucks County Community College, negotiated the first contract for part-time faculty at Bucks, and served there as a union leader.  Currently, I am Secretary of the Faculty and Staff Federation of Community College of Philadelphia and a part-time faculty member at that college. I worked on the parity issue with leaders from Bucks County Community College, Montgomery County Community College, Community College of Philadelphia and Temple University. I was a speaker at AFT PA conferences and was the 1998 AFL-CIO Labor Day speaker to promote the issue of parity. Throughout my career as a union leader, the full-time faculty with whom I worked was instrumental in helping the part-time leaders at critical junctions.

When we organized the part-time faculty at Bucks, the advice of the full-time faculty who helped us was indispensable and the risks they took to help us were commendable.  When we negotiated our first contract, we needed their guidance and experience. They spent many hours at the bargaining table with us fighting for a contract that was not theirs. When writing the parity legislation, full-time faculty from all of those colleges met repeatedly with and advised the part-time leaders at a point when the only issue on the table was parity for part-timers.  I was amazed at their commitment on an issue which did not involve them directly.  Through these full-time faculty members, I learned what it was to be in a union.  Solidarity and concern for the working conditions of all is essential to that union's progress.  Anyone who does not think that way is not worthy of being in a union and is a liability to that union.

The part-time faculty needs the support of the full-time faculty, and they need ours to accomplish our joint goals. The FACE legislation should help both groups equally. The AFT has done its job to advance the needs of all its higher education faculty members with this legislation. I would expect nothing less from such a democratic, fair organization. The bill is a comprehensive remedy to the abuses and cost-saving measures that have been taken in higher education to the detriment of all faculty. The issues that face full-time and part-time faculty are inseparable, and the legislation is essential for students to be served by a faculty who are a well-paid and stable workforce, and who are invested in the college where they teach.

This tactic of divide and conquer is what administrators use to cause faculty to be their own worst enemy.  It causes dissension and loss of momentum.  Legislation that includes all faculty is only fair because this is a two-sided issue.