next »

[categorical]

If you want to get a good sense of the ideological forces arrayed against labor in higher education, take a look at today's editorial in the Wall Street Journal:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204409904574350834263887324.html

[kedves]

If you want to get a good sense of the ideological forces arrayed against labor in higher education, take a look at today's editorial in the Wall Street Journal:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204409904574350834263887324.html

I like the Journal for news; it's my home page.  But do you really expect them to come out in favor of unions?  That would be news!

[onion]

I saw a silver lining in that WSJ piece: a job might be opening in the Ed School.

"John Witte, an education scholar at the school, says he would quit if the faculty organize. He tells us it would be 'demoralizing to see my hard work rewarded with the same pay as someone who doesn't do hard work.'"  (I'll refrain from calling this person an a$$klown.)

And what the heck does this mean:
"Traditionally the most prestigious public university campuses have resisted unionization." Really? Like where?  They don't follow up on that claim with any evidence.  Which prestigious public university faculty have resisted unionization?  And have they resisted it, or have they been thwarted by the Board of Trustees?

[wilbrish]

Oh, and the Comments are unbelievable.  But the WSJ has not been a credible newspaper for a long time.

[prytania3]

Oh, and the Comments are unbelievable.  But the WSJ has not been a credible newspaper for a long time.

I agree. It's become a rag. It's the Enquirer of business news.

[anthroid]

Oh, I thought this thread about about American Idol.

My bad.

[changinggears]

Why go to the WSJ to see these forces when you can just take a look at some of the comments made on this forum?  When we have forumites referring to an adjunct as "such a person" who would never be considered worth hiring full-time or even hiring at all unless it was a dire emergency, apparently it's amazing that "such a person" has the wits to read and understand an article in the WSJ (or even know what WSJ stands for)!

[mended_drum]

Why go to the WSJ to see these forces when you can just take a look at some of the comments made on this forum?  When we have forumites referring to an adjunct as "such a person" who would never be considered worth hiring full-time or even hiring at all unless it was a dire emergency, apparently it's amazing that "such a person" has the wits to read and understand an article in the WSJ (or even know what WSJ stands for)!

Hmmm...it's possible that's a response to something I posted elsewhere, in which case "such a person" was someone with no previous college-level teaching experience and without a Ph.D. (or the equivalent highest degree in the field), not adjuncts in general.  The huge over-supply of Ph.D.s in the humanities has produced this situation, not disdain for adjuncts as intelligent people. 

On topic, though, I agree that the WSJ is unlikely to say anything good about unions; the piece is terribly slanted.

[jonesey]

Evidently, a PhD requires "no critical thinking; you just log in the hours" and the uni hands you your degree.

Who knew, and where is this school? 

[tee_bee]

Per the WSJ: "But over the past 10 years or so, unions have become an increasingly common presence at colleges and universities."

They really need to set foot south of the Mason-Dixon line. The day the sun sets in the East is the day southern public universities unionize.

But the guy quoted in this article does have a point. At my former northeastern public institution, the union (1) represented faculty and staff, whose interests, to be kind, are not congruent; (2) was led by a group of labor historians and born-too-late would-be Wobblies who signed everything "in solidarity," AFL-CIO style; and (3) was rock-ribbed in its opposition to any initiative that would reward creativity and productivity. Mediocrity, on the other hand, was not only encouraged--it was celebrated. YMMV, and some places really do need unions. But faculty really should stand up to unions if they create a whole stratum of deadwood.

Still and all, I don't read the WSJ op-ed pages because they are almost 100% divorced from the reality-based world.