4 ms·

You're missing the point (and are callously insensitive to the plight of another human being, in my honest opinion). He's working full time hours, with more tha

by girvo 12y ago

You're missing the point (and are callously insensitive to the plight of another human being, in my honest opinion). He's working full time hours, with more than full time responsibilities, but the University is using technicalities and loopholes to avoid giving him the benefits that we as a society have decided all full time employees should have. I think that sort of behaviour is abhorrent, and frankly anyone who defends that strikes me as a "fuck you, I've got mine" kind of person. I make far more than this person does, and I can make the trade-off to do contract work for higher pay. His trade off is "contract" work for lower pay than the full timers with more than full time work load, and he doesn't get to trade higher job security for lower pay like we do. He's being exploited and has the worst of all worlds, and he's teaching the next generation of this world, and you're sitting here saying he gets what he deserves? You've got to be kidding me.

morgante 12y ago
I don't think it's fair to say he's being exploited. He's a highly educated white male in a prosperous nation. He has plenty of agency and has had many options throughout his life. If you read his follow up, he admits that he's explicitly choosing this job for personal reasons (flexible hours allow for him to provide parental care). When there is a long queue of people who would love to take your job, I just don't see how you can call it exploitation. He's not being manipulated; he's just accepting the low pay as a tradeoff for flexible hours. I suppose you could maybe argue that there's a positive externality to his employment which the market doesn't capture (note: this would be separate from the positive externalities of education, which is already subsidized), but I'm skeptical. There's a long queue of people who would love even his marginal academic job. Obviously, I do feel sorry for the guy. I'd never want to be in his situation myself, but I also feel he should admit his own agency in getting himself into it (hopefully helping to tear down the glorification of academic jobs in the meantime). Moreover, most of my sympathy tends to go to people in genuinely exploitive and helpless conditions (ex. children born into poverty; women in tyranical underdeveloped countries, etc.).

by girvo 12y ago

morgante 12y ago

I don't think it's fair to say he's being exploited. He's a highly educated white male in a prosperous nation. He has plenty of agency and has had many options throughout his life. If you read his follow up, he admits that he's explicitly choosing this job for personal reasons (flexible hours allow for him to provide parental care). When there is a long queue of people who would love to take your job, I just don't see how you can call it exploitation. He's not being manipulated; he's just accepting the low pay as a tradeoff for flexible hours. I suppose you could maybe argue that there's a positive externality to his employment which the market doesn't capture (note: this would be separate from the positive externalities of education, which is already subsidized), but I'm skeptical. There's a long queue of people who would love even his marginal academic job. Obviously, I do feel sorry for the guy. I'd never want to be in his situation myself, but I also feel he should admit his own agency in getting himself into it (hopefully helping to tear down the glorification of academic jobs in the meantime). Moreover, most of my sympathy tends to go to people in genuinely exploitive and helpless conditions (ex. children born into poverty; women in tyranical underdeveloped countries, etc.).