Grad students listen and express their views at forum on unionization

By Jacquie Powers

A spirited but respectful crowd of mostly graduate students overflowed the seats of Call Alumni Auditorium in Kennedy Hall last week, eager to join the discussion of whether to form a collective bargaining unit for Cornell's 2,300 teaching assistants, research assistants, graduate research assistants and graduate assistants.

Doctoral student Noelle Chesley makes a point from the audience during the Sept. 18 Faculty Forum in Call Alumni Auditorium. Charles Harrington/University Photography

Edward Lawler, dean of the School of Industrial and Labor Relations, moderated the Sept. 18 Faculty Forum, organized by J. Robert Cooke, dean of the faculty. Six panelists spoke briefly, as long lines of graduate students filled the aisles, waiting to speak on both sides of the issue. Vigorous applause accompanied their widely differing views.

Panelists included faculty members Harry Katz, the J. Sheinkman Professor in Collective Bargaining; Nick Salvatore, professor, Industrial and Labor Relations and American studies; Stewart Schwab, professor of law; Mary Opperman, vice president for human resources; and graduate students Anne McNeil, chemical and chemical biology, and Robb Willer, sociology.

The university and the Cornell Association of Student Employees/UAW (CASE/UAW) reached agreements in July that defined the bargaining unit, set dates for the National Labor Relations Board-administered election and recognized that certain academic issues lie outside the scope of bargaining. The union and the university also agreed to procedures to be followed by both parties in the event that there are subsequent NLRB rulings that revise the present interpretation of the status of graduate student assistants as employees. The representation election will be held Oct. 23 and 24.

Katz congratulated the university on its good working relationships with the six unions already represented on campus and on its actions during the early stages of the current unionization effort. But he criticized a Sept. 3 statement made by President Hunter Rawlings, which suggested that a union is not in the best interest of Cornell's grad students. While noting that employers have the legal right under the National Labor Relations Act to express their views on this issue, Katz said it was "presumptuous" of them to do so.

He also noted that research has shown that collective bargaining has had no statistically significant impact on wages for graduate students, although it has had some impact on health benefits.

McNeil, who is a member of At What Cost, a student group opposing the union, pointed out that Cornell already offers health benefits to graduate students and that departments now have the flexibility to pay competitively as needed. She said that flexibility would be lost to union standardization, and she suggested that the union has made little progress on wages for graduate students elsewhere. She also questioned whether the UAW could effectively represent graduate students, who perform many different jobs in a wide variety of fields.

"What is the cost of saying 'yes'?" McNeil asked. "If you vote 'yes' it will have a big impact on the coffers of the UAW. And unlike union organizers, I'm not being paid to say this."

Opperman explained that the administration does not believe the union is in the best interest of graduate students because of the potential loss of flexibility, the fundamental change in the relationship between the university and its students and the disparity in the needs of graduate students. However, she stressed that the university is committed to avoiding negative or hostile tactics during the union drive.

"Cornell University has world-class graduate students who are capable of taking in multiple viewpoints and making their own decisions," Opperman said. She added that the two most important things that needed to be said today are, "We need to keep this conversation at a reasoned level and we need every student to go vote."

Willer, a union organizer, said the administration's message implies "fundamental disrespect ... that we as grad students must be saved from ourselves."

He debated the flexibility issue, saying the union can negotiate flexibility into the contract. Further, he said, in some departments flexibility isn't necessarily a good thing, and the union "can eliminate bad flexibility while retaining good flexibility."

He also said the UAW has achieved substantial pay increases for many grad student workers at New York University.

"Now we have almost no voice in pay and benefits," Willer said. "The union not only gives us more say in pay and work conditions, but it's a more democratic process. ... We're only asking for a democratic voice here. And for dignity and respect."

Salvatore, who noted that he had been a union organizer years ago in his own graduate student days, said "an important part of a graduate student's responsibilities are, in fact, work and work-related. ... I do not believe that graduate student organizing is inherently detrimental to the university, is inherently detrimental to the faculty or is inherently detrimental to the graduate students and their education."

He pointed to the long history of contractual apprenticeships in the United States, dating back to the 18th century, and said he looks forward to the conversation at Cornell.

Schwab said graduate students must ask themselves, "How satisfied are you now? Is your voice being heard? That's not something I can answer -- only you can answer that."

He said students must determine if there is a sufficient community of interests to warrant joining together. But, he added, "I applaud the seriousness with which this decision is being taken and urge you to carefully weigh the pros and cons."