4 ms·

The most disappointing aspect of this is how many people are locked out from these opportunities because they don't have or come from the family wealth to suppo

The most disappointing aspect of this is how many people are locked out from these opportunities because they don't have or come from the family wealth to support living in a place like Santa Cruz while studying full time and TA'ing at such low wages. Something's gotta give, and only people with the means to do so can take the financial hit.

ajross 7y ago
It's... more complicated than that. There is an existing union that represents these people which has negotiated an existing collective bargaining agreement. This strike wasn't authorized. Now... maybe the union cut a bad deal, maybe their representatives aren't faithfully honoring their commitment, maybe there is literal corruption involved. But what is not true is that these workers were unrepresented at the salary negotiation. Breaking the deal like this makes negotiating the next contract harder, not easier.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
  Graduate programs are usually filled with a completely new set of students after 2-3 years. The likelihood of students taking similar actions in future years will have no bearing on the actions taken today by those currently enrolled. Having a union doesn't fundamentally change the un-affordability of accepting below-market wages for skilled labor in a high cost of living area. They might be getting a better deal than they would have otherwise, but clearly there's a disconnect between the UC system, the union, and the students on the premise of today's arrangement and its long term viability.
  - ajross 7y ago
    Obviously no, strikes and labor actions can't change the microeconomics. But regardless of whether or not the wages are sufficient, and whether the agreement is just or not, it's an agreement. Breaking it only hurts things for future students, it doesn't help. Consider the union sitting down to the next contract, how do they negotiate successfully if UCSC doesn't believe their members will honor the agreement?
    - asdff 7y ago
      On the other hand, what to the grad students at UCSC do if they weren't represented at the bargaining table by their own union in the first place? The agreement is not one the grad students at UCSC and UCSC, but with the grad students at all UC campuses with the University of California, et al. 83% of UCSC grad students opposed the original UC wide negotiation because the salary minimums did not take into account the rising cost of living in Santa Cruz due to market pressure in the bay area. They are striking without the support of their union because the union never supported their situation in the first place.
      - dantheman 7y ago
        That's between them and their union - they can stop paying union dues, they can leave the union.
        saagarjha 7y ago
        Not at the University of California…
        garmaine 7y ago
        No, they can't. That would be illegal in this circumstance.
- gyrgtyn 7y ago
  All the TAs at that school voted against the deal the union made.
  - readhn 7y ago
    that little detail, everyone seems to miss...
    - refurb 7y ago
      Does it matter? They asked their union to represent them along with the other UCSC union members (they are a small part of the members). The union did so, and they are held to that contract.
      - epistasis 7y ago
        If somebody bargains on your behalf, and you have no way to reject what they bargained for, can you really say that they acted in your behalf at all?
        crummy 7y ago
        You just need to form a union-union (meta-union?) to bargain with your union.
        refurb 7y ago
        Sure. That comes with the territory of joining a union. The union negotiates on behalf of all members under the contract. If they didn't want that arrangement, they shouldn't have joined a union or that union in particular.
        asdff 7y ago
        So what now? CA is a closed shop state, the students can't cancel their membership and join a new one. So they strike without the support of their union, their union gets sued by UC, and now their union is countersuing for a cost of living adjustment as of three days ago. If all pans out, taking this wildcat strike was exactly the right move to make. https://uaw2865.org/uc-student-worker-union-files-unfair-labor-practice-charge-against-the-university/ https://uaw2865.org/uc-student-worker-union-files-unfair-lab...
- asdff 7y ago
  > But what is not true is that these workers were unrepresented at the salary negotiation. But many are if every year brings about a new set of graduate students. Perhaps you started your PhD at UCSC 4 years ago, with the understanding that compensation would be different, a wildly different real estate market than today, and under a different agreement by the school. So yes, future students were not represented at the salary negotiation, and a the same time, students who came to the school before the negotiation came under a different pretext with a different understanding of the local rental economy and graduate compensation that is no longer true today.

ajross 7y ago

It's... more complicated than that. There is an existing union that represents these people which has negotiated an existing collective bargaining agreement. This strike wasn't authorized. Now... maybe the union cut a bad deal, maybe their representatives aren't faithfully honoring their commitment, maybe there is literal corruption involved. But what is not true is that these workers were unrepresented at the salary negotiation. Breaking the deal like this makes negotiating the next contract harder, not easier.

JMTQp8lwXL 7y ago
Graduate programs are usually filled with a completely new set of students after 2-3 years. The likelihood of students taking similar actions in future years will have no bearing on the actions taken today by those currently enrolled. Having a union doesn't fundamentally change the un-affordability of accepting below-market wages for skilled labor in a high cost of living area. They might be getting a better deal than they would have otherwise, but clearly there's a disconnect between the UC system, the union, and the students on the premise of today's arrangement and its long term viability.
- ajross 7y ago
  Obviously no, strikes and labor actions can't change the microeconomics. But regardless of whether or not the wages are sufficient, and whether the agreement is just or not, it's an agreement. Breaking it only hurts things for future students, it doesn't help. Consider the union sitting down to the next contract, how do they negotiate successfully if UCSC doesn't believe their members will honor the agreement?
  - asdff 7y ago
    On the other hand, what to the grad students at UCSC do if they weren't represented at the bargaining table by their own union in the first place? The agreement is not one the grad students at UCSC and UCSC, but with the grad students at all UC campuses with the University of California, et al. 83% of UCSC grad students opposed the original UC wide negotiation because the salary minimums did not take into account the rising cost of living in Santa Cruz due to market pressure in the bay area. They are striking without the support of their union because the union never supported their situation in the first place.
    - dantheman 7y ago
      That's between them and their union - they can stop paying union dues, they can leave the union.
      - saagarjha 7y ago
        Not at the University of California…
      - garmaine 7y ago
        No, they can't. That would be illegal in this circumstance.
gyrgtyn 7y ago
All the TAs at that school voted against the deal the union made.
- readhn 7y ago
  that little detail, everyone seems to miss...
  - refurb 7y ago
    Does it matter? They asked their union to represent them along with the other UCSC union members (they are a small part of the members). The union did so, and they are held to that contract.
    - epistasis 7y ago
      If somebody bargains on your behalf, and you have no way to reject what they bargained for, can you really say that they acted in your behalf at all?
      - crummy 7y ago
        You just need to form a union-union (meta-union?) to bargain with your union.
      - refurb 7y ago
        Sure. That comes with the territory of joining a union. The union negotiates on behalf of all members under the contract. If they didn't want that arrangement, they shouldn't have joined a union or that union in particular.
        asdff 7y ago
        So what now? CA is a closed shop state, the students can't cancel their membership and join a new one. So they strike without the support of their union, their union gets sued by UC, and now their union is countersuing for a cost of living adjustment as of three days ago. If all pans out, taking this wildcat strike was exactly the right move to make. https://uaw2865.org/uc-student-worker-union-files-unfair-labor-practice-charge-against-the-university/ https://uaw2865.org/uc-student-worker-union-files-unfair-lab...
asdff 7y ago
> But what is not true is that these workers were unrepresented at the salary negotiation. But many are if every year brings about a new set of graduate students. Perhaps you started your PhD at UCSC 4 years ago, with the understanding that compensation would be different, a wildly different real estate market than today, and under a different agreement by the school. So yes, future students were not represented at the salary negotiation, and a the same time, students who came to the school before the negotiation came under a different pretext with a different understanding of the local rental economy and graduate compensation that is no longer true today.