Some Thoughts on TA Strikes

At the time of writing (Thursday PM), Teaching Assistant Unions at both the University of Toronto and York University are on strike, as is the union representing sessionals at York.  Since Toronto is indeed “The Centre of the Universe”, I’m sure everyone across the country is just riveted by this news.  At the risk of irritating those readers still further, I thought I’d jot down a few thoughts on the matter.

1)      A lot of people seem to be wondering “why are we relying so much on adjunct labour these days?”  The quick answer is “because profs are spending more time researching and less time teaching than they used to”; sessionals are an emergent property of a system that gets paid to teach, but prefers to spend money on research.  See also this recent piece on the economics of sessionals.

2)      It’s for this reason that I’m finding the OCUFA campaign on sessionals – “WeTeachOntario” – mindbogglingly un-self-aware.  It’s great to support sessionals, of course, but the utter lack of any kind of recognition that full-time faculty’s well-above-inflation pay settlements, and their perennial push to research more and teach less are significant contributing factors to the problem is simply amazing.

3)      The University of Waterloo’s Emmett Macfarlane wrote a very good piece on the TA strike on the Policy Options blog, which summed up a lot of my feelings about the strikes.  The issue pretty clearly isn’t about what students get paid for their labour as TAs (which at over $40/hr is pretty good), but what they receive overall (i.e. labour plus scholarship), which they feel is inadequate.  And yet it’s the labour tool they are using to address the problem, which is… problematic.

4)      On the issue of whether U of T grad students are, as they frequently claim, “living below the poverty level”:  The union keeps using a figure of $23,000 as the Toronto poverty level, which is in fact the pre-tax low-income cut off for large cities.  The post-tax figure – which is the more accurate comparison, since TA labour income is below the level at which income gets taxed and scholarships are tax-free up to $10K – is $19,000.  Or $1,583/month.  The base TA/grad package is $15K for 8 months or $1,875/month.  So the veracity of the claim seems to rest on the assumption that grad students get no outside income in those other 4 months.  My guess is that’s not for the most part true – they’ll either take on extra work or have an outside scholarship.

5)      What doctoral students are really asking for is that they be treated as employees, not just for their teaching duties but also for the entirety of their academic labour.  And that’s not crazy: in much of Europe, doctoral students are in fact university employees, and reasonably well paid.  There’s nothing to stop a university doing that here: in fact, some might argue that it would substantially improve a university’s ability to recruit graduate students.

The problem – as always – is money: universities don’t want to make the sacrifices to other aspects of the university budget (including, obviously, academic and staff pay) to make this work.  One possible compromise would be to turn PhD students into employees, but accept far fewer of them; but here you’d run into the problem of Arts professors having to backfill by doing more teaching themselves, and Science professors going bananas because now who’s going to run the labs?

To which, with some justification, doctoral students might simply say: Exactly. We’re worth more than you think.   And I’d have a fair bit of sympathy with that.

Have a good weekend.

Posted in

4 responses to “Some Thoughts on TA Strikes

  1. “because profs are spending more time researching and less time teaching than they used to”

    On some level this rather anodyne statement (which you repeat often) must be true, depending how far back “used to” is pushed. But I am skeptical of it as an historical explanation.

    Since that “used to” date, whatever it is, have we not also seen a significant expansion in student numbers? Has there been a corresponding expansion in numbers of continuing faculty that kept pace with the student increase? I would love to see these numbers graphed for, say, 1990 to the present. Maybe you have already written on this, if so a link would be great.

  2. The statement “The base TA/grad package is $15K for 8 months or $1,875/month” is inaccurate. The package is for 12 months. Yes, the TAing portion of the combination only lasts 8 months, but that $15k is expected to cover a graduate student for the full calendar year. The four months of summer are when graduate students have time to do their independent research. For historians, for example, this is the time when students are able to go abroad and research in archives, which is essential for the creation of a dissertation. Some students might take on additional summer TAships, but the number of these offered are far, far smaller than the regular school year. I’m not sure what the assumption that graduate students take on extra work in the summer is based on, other than the fact that living on $15,000 for 12 months sounds so hard that it leads to the assumption that these graduate students MUST be finding additional income. But if they are, it would significantly challenge their ability to do their own research, and would almost certainly keep them at university for numerous years longer than the maximum funded period.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search the Blog

Enjoy Reading?

Get One Thought sent straight to your inbox.
Subscribe now.