The Deplorable State of Adjunct Faculty Compensation

It is not just K-12 public school teachers who are getting squeezed by budget cuts, stagnant pay, declining working conditions and attacks on tenure. Today, nearly 70% of all college and university faculty are non-tenured, part-time adjunct faculty (according to a recent piece in Truth Out), with no job security and generally lower pay and fewer benefits than their tenured colleagues.

Many of these professors find themselves having to accept teaching positions at multiple universities and colleges just to make enough to support themselves, sometimes having to commute to two or three different campuses in one day. It is not uncommon in the community colleges for adjuncts to earn as little as $2,500 per class. For adjuncts teaching 3-4 classes per semester, this translates to $15,000-20,000 per year, often without any benefits.

Some adjuncts make good money. At UCSF, for example, adjunct professors can earn six-figure salaries. However, their job security is based entirely on their ability to compete for scarce research grants, as the university provides them with little or no additional funding and makes no commitment to support them if their grants run dry.  These adjuncts, who must constantly contend with the threat of losing their labs and their income, often put in 60-80 hour weeks just to keep their grants flowing and, consequently, suffer an incredible amount of pressure and stress.

A number of factors have been contributing to the problem, including the nation’s economic crisis, which has exacerbated many states’ existing budget difficulties. In order to close their deficits, universities have not only been cutting classes and raising tuition for their students; they have also been squeezing their employees by cutting wages, benefits and teaching assignments. At the same time, the number of college graduates competing for these jobs has been rising. This may be part of the reason why the number of people possessing PhDs who receive public assistance has tripled over the last three years. Between 2007 and 2010 the number grew from 9,776 to 33,655.

However, the decline in tenured faculty positions started well before the current economic crisis. The New York Times reported in November, 2007, that tenured faculty had already become the minority on campuses across the country. 30 years ago, adjuncts made up only 43% of faculty nation-wide, whereas by 2007 they comprised 70% of faculty. The Times attributed the trend to administrators’ desire to save money and have greater “flexibility.” What this really means is greater ease in manipulating, coercing and firing, since part-timers and adjuncts, in general, have little or no job security and must toe the line and keep their mouths shut if they want to keep their jobs.

It also means more money is available for executive compensation, which has been on the rise even as tuition has climbed and employee compensation has declined. The San Francisco Chronicle reported this week that executive pay at the nation’s private colleges climbed 2.8% between 2009 and 2010 (the last year in which records are available). The median compensation for the nearly 500 presidents of private universities with budgets of at least $50 million was nearly $400,000, with 36 executives earning more than $1 million annually. However, executive compensation at public universities has also been rising rapidly. California Senator Leland Yee recently introduced legislation that would bar the state’s UC and CSU systems from giving any raises or bonuses until two years after the latest fee hikes.

As with many aspects of the education system, the interests of teachers are linked to the wellbeing of students. Several studies have found that freshmen taught by part-timers are more likely to drop out. This is probably due to the fact that part-timers and adjuncts, in general, have more work to do and less time to do it, forcing many to reduce or abandon office hours. They are more likely to accept excessive or unreasonable course loads in order to increase their salaries or to be eligible for benefits. They also are less likely to advocate for better conditions for themselves and their students out of fear of getting fewer (or no) classes in the coming semesters.

UC’s Secret Lover. . . Wall Street . . . Students and Employees Get Screwed

Huck/Konopacki Labor Cartoons

California voters recently approved Proposition 30, which would temporarily raise taxes slightly on the wealthiest state residents while also imposing a regressive sales tax hike on the poorest residents. The measure is expected to help close California’s current $16 billion deficit, but not to restore the tens of billions in revenues that have been slashed over the past few years.

I recently wrote that despite the increased revenues from Prop 30, both of the state’s major university systems (CSU and UC) will be increasing fees and tuition for some students. In the case of UC, tuition for certain graduate programs could increase as much as 35%.

It is not simply that Prop 30 doesn’t come close to restoring pre-recession funding levels. It doesn’t. There is a deeper, institutional problem that Prop 30 merely covers up and plays into: The tax system and the political system are both designed to maximize the profits and bolster the economic interests of the employing class. Consider that Prop 30 did not touch capital gains, inheritance, corporate or property taxes. It did nothing to bring oil royalties up to the fairly low rates charged by Texas and Alaska. It essentially left the filthy rich filthy rich and the moderately rich still comfortably rich.

Even some of the increased revenues from Prop 30 that are earmarked for education will go directly into the hands of Wall Street bankers, rather than toward tuition reductions, increased course offerings or raises for professors. According to a recent report by UC Berkeley researchers, the UC Board of regents has made risky deals with Wall Street banks over the past decade known as interest rate swaps. They supposedly did this as a hedge against rising interest rates on variable rate bonds, but the swaps turned out to be a losing bet because interest rates dropped in the wake of the 2008 financial meltdown and have remained low since then.

These swap deals have already cost UC almost $57 million, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. However, another $200 million in losses are anticipated over the next 30 years (the university is currently paying Wall Street close to $750,000 per month according to the Nation). UC is expected to receive $250 million from Prop 30, which is not even enough to cover its Wall Street debts, let alone provide any financial relief for its students or employees.  Nevertheless, the university plans on spending $10 million a year from Prop 30 to service its Wall Street debt, leaving little for tuition relief, increased course offerings, student services or wage increases for employees. Tuition has tripled over the past few years, while salaries for professors and other employees have remained stagnant. Indeed, the regents are warning of more cuts and tuition increases, despite Prop 30, including a 24% across-the-board tuition hike over the next four years.

One might reasonably wonder how the regents made such a blunder. After all, it is well known among gamblers that, in the end, the House always comes out on top. But this wasn’t simply a matter of some naïve regents making a bad gamble. Rather, the regents ARE Wall Street insiders. They not only knew exactly what they were doing, but likely did it to enrich themselves and their cronies at the expense of taxpayers, students and employees. For example, the regent’s chief financial officer, Peter Taylor, came from Lehman Bros, where he had been managing director for public finance at a time when Lehman Bros. had been hired to help expand UC's debt load. Taylor continued to work for Lehman Bros while he was a regent. UC’s interest rate swap with Lehman ultimately cost the university over $23 million.

Similarly, UC Regent Monica Lozano has earned $1.5 million serving on the Board of Bank of America at the same time the university negotiated interest rate swaps with BofA worth a potential $28 million in profits to the bank. UC Executive Vice President Nathan Brostrom—a former managing director for public finance at JP Morgan—worked on financing for UC at a time when his former company was hired as a bond broker and swap counterparty for the UC Davis Medical Center, a deal in which the university ultimately lost $22.5 million. And UC Regent Russell Gould, who chaired the finance committee from 2008 to 2009 and the full board from 2009 to 2010, was receiving a salary from Wachovia/Wells Fargo from 1996 to 2009. (The regents’ biographies have been excerpted from the UC report)

The UC Berkeley report notes that the university obtained the interest rate swaps in order to finance the development of medical centers on three of its campuses (UCLA, UCD and UCSF). Since the medical centers are money-making enterprises for the university and since student tuition was used as collateral for the interest rate swaps, there was a financial incentive for the regents to jack up tuition. However, the university never had a chance to win on its gambles as the interest rate swaps were all based on rates determined by LIBOR, rates that were rigged in one of the largest banking scandals in history. (BofA is one of the banks currently under investigation in the LIBOR scandal).

Some have argued that the swaps made sense at the time and that the regents, despite the conflict of interest, had the university’s best interests in mind. However, if this was true, one might expect them to re-negotiate their loans or sue the banks, as have many other large institutions that have been screwed by similar deals. So far, they have made no indication that either plan is in the works. On the contrary, some regents are arguing that the swaps are still good deals, since the bonds don’t mature until 2047.

Meanwhile, the university will continue to transfer three quarters of a million dollars per month from the taxpayers to Wall Street banks to service their loans, thus keeping the bankers comfortable and their employees and students ever more stretched.

California’s College Crisis: Nearly Half a Million on Waitlist

Huck/Konopacki Labor Cartoons

I hope I will be forgiven for exploiting the word “crisis” after repeatedly criticizing Ed Deformers, politicians and the wealthy for regularly misusing the term. Yet the situation in California’s community colleges seems to warrant such language. After all, the state’s community college system has lost $809 million over the last three years, resulting in mass layoffs, increased fees, the gutting of course offerings (down 24% from the 2008-9 school year), and large increases in class sizes. Perhaps the most dramatic effect of these cuts is the wait list of 472,349 students (according to the California Community Chancellor’s Office) who are trying to get into the system.

The problem could get dramatically worse in November, if voters reject Proposition 30, a tax increase intended to raise funds for public education. If that bill fails, Good Education reports, the community college system will be forced to make another $228 million cut in January, 2013.

Considering that the community colleges serve low income students of color, workers trying to gain new job skills, and those who cannot afford the four-year universities, the rising costs and declining openings at community colleges will likely result in deferred or abandoned college educations for many students and, consequently, reduced earning power.

Tax Dollars at Work: CSU Spent $2 Million on Presidential Homes

Tuition at the California State University (CSU) system increased from $1,428 per year in 2001-2 to $5,472 in 2011, with another 9% rate hike planned for the fall of 2012. Because of budget cuts and financial insecurity, the university has also cut course offerings and services. Yet in that same 10-year period, CSU spent over $2 million renovating eight university-owned presidential residences, including such extras as expanding garages and hiring interior designers, according to a report this week in the Bay Citizen.

In 2012, alone, CSU spent over $400,000 remodeling presidential homes at CSU Fullerton and CSU Northridge, in the Los Angeles Area. In 2011, it spent $257,000 on kitchen upgrades and swimming pool replastering at San Diego State, and another $230,000 on kitchen upgrades and lighting at Cal Poly San Luis Obsipo. Cal Poly also spent $200,000 on renovations in 2010--$831,000 total since 2004, 99% of which was paid for through state funding.

11 university presidents live in these lavish homes at tax-payers’ expense. Another 12 university presidents are getting $60,000 per year in housing allowances to covering living costs off campus. All this is on top of their six-figure salaries (some have also received raises), which alone ought to be sufficient to live comfortably within easy commuting distance of any of the CSU campuses.

Cal State Faculty to Vote on Largest University Strike in U.S. History

California State University faculty started a strike authorization vote yesterday after 22 months of failed talks over salary, class sizes and other issues, the Los Angeles Times reported this week. Professors have had no raise in 5 years and are asking for a modest 1% pay increase for each year of the new contract, plus more control over class sizes and greater stability for faculty with temporary contracts.

A yes vote would result in two-day rolling strikes at the University’s 23 campuses, beginning in the fall of 2012, according to California Faculty Association, which represents 23,000 Cal State professors, lecturers, librarians, counselors and coaches.

The CSU system lost $750 million this fiscal year, with another $200-million reduction planned for next year if the governor’s tax plan fails to win enough votes in November. CSU has faced multiple large scale budget cuts for each of the past few years. In response it has increased tuition each year, slashed course offerings and turned away thousands of students.


As usual, Cal State officials claimed the union's demands would be prohibitive at a time of severe budget cuts. Yet administrators have been getting raises of 10% or more for the past few years. SDSU’s new president, for example, is earning $100,000 more than the previous president, a 25% salary hike.

Strike Early, Strike Often

If CSU faculty walks out, it would be the largest university strike in U.S. history and one of the largest strikes in the past five years. American workers need a good strike, particularly a successful one. The unions have all but given up strikes and other job actions that place financial pressure on the bosses even though these are our most effective weapons for winning improvement in compensation and working conditions.

Any large strike has the potential to inspire and embolden other workers. Strikes can beget more strikes, particularly when successful. The more workers go out on strike, the more the bosses will listen and compromise in hopes of averting larger, more militant and more demanding strikes. So long as workers remain quiescent, the bosses will continue to walk all over us under the belief they can do so without any risk or consequence.

UC Davis Guilty at All Levels in Student Pepper-Spraying Incident

According to a report released this week, the pepper spraying of student Occupy protesters at the University of California, Davis last November, should never have happened. Students had been protesting rising tuition, privatization, and declining student services.

According to the report, the use pepper spray on seated protesters was not justified nor authorized, the Bay Citizen reported. The spraying was carried out at close range, though it is not supposed to be used at a range of less than six feet. Furthermore, the pepper spray used by the police was a high potency variety that was not approved for use on peaceful protestors. As a result, two students were hospitalized, while twelve others were treated and released by fire department personnel.

The task force, chaired by former California Supreme Court Justice Cruz Reynoso, held the university completely responsible for the atrocity, blaming campus police and the administration of UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi. Reynoso is an emeritus professor at the UC Davis law school. The task force was made up of 12 current and former UCD officials, professors, alumni and students.

The report also concluded that campus police leaders never confirmed their assertion that the protest involved outside agitators (not that this would have justified the brutality they used), nor did they consider alternative, less violent options, compromises or communication with the student activists.

Global Student Protests Continue

Over the past year, students have been protesting throughout the world against cuts to public education and privatization schemes. Here’s a roundup for September, from the International Student Movement website:

• Greek students have occupied more than 224 facilities since September 1^st. They also occupied the state television network this week and succeeded in getting a public statement read over the air. They have been protesting increasing tuition and attacks on their student organizations.
• In Chile, students have been demonstrating in the streets for months against the privatization of the education system and increased student fees.
• On September 6, student protesters confronted Cabinet Ministers in Galway, Ireland, over the closure of Roscommon hospital’s emergency department and increasing tuition.
• 100 students occupied a grammar school overnight in Bremen, Germany, this month to protest budget cuts.
• Students and teachers in Colombia went on strike this month over a new law that increases the privatization of the universities.
• In Kenya teachers blocked the Nairobi-Naivasha highway to demand that they be hired as permanent employees rather than contract workers.
• Students and staff went on strike at the American University of Cairo to protest increasing tuition and to demand higher wages for university employees.
• Thousands of people protested in front of the parliament in Rome against a new austerity package that includes education cuts.
• Hundreds of students protested at the University of the Philippines, in Diliman, against education cuts, while 8,000 students, faculty and employees at the Polytechnic University of the Philippines-Sta.Mesa marched against education cuts.
• Students at Dhaka University in Bangladesh demonstrated against a newly introduced fine for students who don't attend class often enough. At least ten students at Rajshahi University (RU) were injured as members of the Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL) allegedly attacked them while staging a sit-in in protest of fee hikes.
• Students occupied the George Square Lecture Theatre of Edinburgh University, Scotland, over the £36,000 in tuition fees charged to British students coming from outside Scotland.
• Tens of thousands of students and teachers marched throughout Spain against cuts to public education and attacks on teachers’ pay and benefits.
• Ongoing protests have been occurring at numerous campuses of the University of California and the Cal State University systems against tuition hikes and cuts in services.

Video: youtube.com