4 ms·

Yes, they're separate from wages that graduate students earn. Roughly—graduate students attend college for free, but for financial aid / regulatory / internal b

Yes, they're separate from wages that graduate students earn. Roughly—graduate students attend college for free, but for financial aid / regulatory / internal budgeting reasons the college can't say they attend for free, so they instead set extremely high tuition numbers and then "pay" that tuition for the students, from one hand of the college to the other hand. But also AIUI Temple took away the whole of the tuition remittance for the entire semester. Companies are allowed to stop paying wages for the time workers are on strike and not working, but taking away tens of thousands of dollars for the entire semester simply for participating in a strike action during a tiny piece of it is absolutely beyond the pale.

giantg2 4y ago
But it's not pay. Their stipend would be pay. The tuition would be a benefit, just as tuition assistance programs at companies are benefits. It's perfectly legal to suspend benefits and pay during a strike, but they must be reinstated when the strike is over. Right or wrong, it seems primia facie legal. Edit: why disagree? What have I said that's factually incorrect? Please, educate us all and add to the discussion in the spirit of the forum.
- jahewson 4y ago
  Right but they’re not suspending the benefit they’re cancelling it. If they pro-rated a portion of the tuition assistance as owed that would be defensible. But this is a rug-pull.
  - giantg2 4y ago
    Is it pro-rated for students who dropout, or more accurately continue to study while dropping out of work-study, during the semester? Depending on how the explaination of benefits is written, it may not pro-rate. Hell, most companies require you pay back tuition assistance if you leave within 2 years after they pay.
  - secabeen 4y ago
    Where do you see that they are cancelling it? Nothing in the statement I see precludes Temple from paying the remission if the strike resolves in two weeks, well before the due date. Even if the strike goes on longer, and the tuition so due is not paid, the penalty is still relatively a minor; a fine, and inability to register for the following quarter (presumably Fall, over 7 months away).
    - thwayunion 4y ago
      > Nothing in the statement I see precludes Temple... Nothing precludes them from doing anything, and nothing precludes students from seeking legal remedies for those actions. Look, I'm not sure. Temple might have a defensible claim for charging tuition; it's a really complicated situation and I wouldn't take advice from anyone who isn't an employment lawyer. But the letter that Temple sent out is probably going to get Temple into some trouble for the reason identified by your parent comment.
      - secabeen 4y ago
        > But the letter that Temple sent out is probably going to get Temple into some trouble for the reason identified by your parent comment. It's certainly gotten them into reputational trouble. I don't think they'll get into legal trouble until there is an actual harm when either the fine is charged, or a registration is blocked. Courts don't generally rule on hypotheticals.
        thwayunion 4y ago
        I'm sure Temple has good lawyers, but I'm skeptical. My employment contract as a graduate student was one page long. There was definitely an implicit consensus ad idem regarding tuition remissions for graduate students. It was not spelled out what exactly entitled me to the remission. It DEFINITELY wasn't an explicit benefit given in consideration for my labor as an RA. In fact, that situation might even be uncredible for universities to claim given the tax structure at play here. Temple's "and therefore you don't get benefits and therefore YOU owe US money!" reasoning might make sense to a Goldman mouth breather, but I somehow doubt that anyone else involved in this agreement going back 5+ decades has ever thought that this is how things are supposed to work. I am genuinely skeptical that the COO (or whatever)'s interpretation of the contract is spelled out in writing in the contracts, or that there was ever a meeting of the minds on this matter. And it's pretty trivial to show damages here without a bill coming due. If I were a grad student I'd put $xxK in a money market account, document my investment plan (or three ;) ), and sue for the opportunity cost plus treble damages even if this all gets resolved.
secabeen 4y ago
> financial aid / regulatory / internal budgeting reasons the college can't say they attend for free, so they instead set extremely high tuition numbers and then "pay" that tuition for the students, from one hand of the college to the other hand. It's not just internal budgeting, it also allows them to accurately charge faculty grants for that tuition. Faculty are given grants by various organizations, but they don't get that money up front, they have to identify a cost relevant to the grant that was paid, then the grantor reimburses. In the case of tuition, the grantors generally require some documentation that the charges are reasonable and allocable, so they are charged whatever tuition would be charged to a student with no TAship or Research Assistant position. > taking away tens of thousands of dollars for the entire semester simply for participating in a strike action during a tiny piece of it is absolutely beyond the pale. Temple is also pushing this way down the calendar. The tuition demanded does not have to be paid until March, and even if not paid then, it only blocks registration for the next semester (presumably Fall). They seem to be minimizing the impact to the degree possible. Hopefully the strike will be over long before then, and this will all be moot.
bradleyjg 4y ago
but taking away tens of thousands of dollars for the entire semester simply for participating in a strike action during a tiny piece of it is absolutely beyond the pale Beyond the pale morally or legally? The grandparent claim is that this is a slam dunk violation of labor law, but I’m not sure that’s true. That said, I’m not a labor law expert. I’d like to hear from one without an ax to grind. Too often advocates conflate what the law currently is with where they think it should go. I’m often interested in both, but want to know which is which.

giantg2 4y ago

But it's not pay. Their stipend would be pay. The tuition would be a benefit, just as tuition assistance programs at companies are benefits. It's perfectly legal to suspend benefits and pay during a strike, but they must be reinstated when the strike is over. Right or wrong, it seems primia facie legal. Edit: why disagree? What have I said that's factually incorrect? Please, educate us all and add to the discussion in the spirit of the forum.

jahewson 4y ago
Right but they’re not suspending the benefit they’re cancelling it. If they pro-rated a portion of the tuition assistance as owed that would be defensible. But this is a rug-pull.
- giantg2 4y ago
  Is it pro-rated for students who dropout, or more accurately continue to study while dropping out of work-study, during the semester? Depending on how the explaination of benefits is written, it may not pro-rate. Hell, most companies require you pay back tuition assistance if you leave within 2 years after they pay.
- secabeen 4y ago
  Where do you see that they are cancelling it? Nothing in the statement I see precludes Temple from paying the remission if the strike resolves in two weeks, well before the due date. Even if the strike goes on longer, and the tuition so due is not paid, the penalty is still relatively a minor; a fine, and inability to register for the following quarter (presumably Fall, over 7 months away).
  - thwayunion 4y ago
    > Nothing in the statement I see precludes Temple... Nothing precludes them from doing anything, and nothing precludes students from seeking legal remedies for those actions. Look, I'm not sure. Temple might have a defensible claim for charging tuition; it's a really complicated situation and I wouldn't take advice from anyone who isn't an employment lawyer. But the letter that Temple sent out is probably going to get Temple into some trouble for the reason identified by your parent comment.
    - secabeen 4y ago
      > But the letter that Temple sent out is probably going to get Temple into some trouble for the reason identified by your parent comment. It's certainly gotten them into reputational trouble. I don't think they'll get into legal trouble until there is an actual harm when either the fine is charged, or a registration is blocked. Courts don't generally rule on hypotheticals.
      - thwayunion 4y ago
        I'm sure Temple has good lawyers, but I'm skeptical. My employment contract as a graduate student was one page long. There was definitely an implicit consensus ad idem regarding tuition remissions for graduate students. It was not spelled out what exactly entitled me to the remission. It DEFINITELY wasn't an explicit benefit given in consideration for my labor as an RA. In fact, that situation might even be uncredible for universities to claim given the tax structure at play here. Temple's "and therefore you don't get benefits and therefore YOU owe US money!" reasoning might make sense to a Goldman mouth breather, but I somehow doubt that anyone else involved in this agreement going back 5+ decades has ever thought that this is how things are supposed to work. I am genuinely skeptical that the COO (or whatever)'s interpretation of the contract is spelled out in writing in the contracts, or that there was ever a meeting of the minds on this matter. And it's pretty trivial to show damages here without a bill coming due. If I were a grad student I'd put $xxK in a money market account, document my investment plan (or three ;) ), and sue for the opportunity cost plus treble damages even if this all gets resolved.

secabeen 4y ago

> financial aid / regulatory / internal budgeting reasons the college can't say they attend for free, so they instead set extremely high tuition numbers and then "pay" that tuition for the students, from one hand of the college to the other hand. It's not just internal budgeting, it also allows them to accurately charge faculty grants for that tuition. Faculty are given grants by various organizations, but they don't get that money up front, they have to identify a cost relevant to the grant that was paid, then the grantor reimburses. In the case of tuition, the grantors generally require some documentation that the charges are reasonable and allocable, so they are charged whatever tuition would be charged to a student with no TAship or Research Assistant position. > taking away tens of thousands of dollars for the entire semester simply for participating in a strike action during a tiny piece of it is absolutely beyond the pale. Temple is also pushing this way down the calendar. The tuition demanded does not have to be paid until March, and even if not paid then, it only blocks registration for the next semester (presumably Fall). They seem to be minimizing the impact to the degree possible. Hopefully the strike will be over long before then, and this will all be moot.

bradleyjg 4y ago

but taking away tens of thousands of dollars for the entire semester simply for participating in a strike action during a tiny piece of it is absolutely beyond the pale Beyond the pale morally or legally? The grandparent claim is that this is a slam dunk violation of labor law, but I’m not sure that’s true. That said, I’m not a labor law expert. I’d like to hear from one without an ax to grind. Too often advocates conflate what the law currently is with where they think it should go. I’m often interested in both, but want to know which is which.