"A Framework On Economic Issues"--The Hopelessness Of "Higher Ed"

The 2023 Rutgers strike has yielded what its president calls "a framework on economic issues." At the point of writing these reflections--in the morning on Saturday, April 15--it is unclear whether the union's rank-and file will ratify it. 

I have been asked whether I think this is a victory, a defeat, or what. Here is how I feel.

It's a flap of a butterfly's wing. Of course we can't exclude the possibility that it would start a transformation of the "universe." But, more likely it is just a lesson to all of us: It is much ado about. . . not much.

The "framework" has resulted in something that could be seen as an almost-win for part time lecturers.  Otherwise--for graduate workers, postdocs, and tenured / tenure track faculty--the nominal pay increases will almost maintain their current income levels, considering current predictions for inflation in the costs of living, barring a major collapse of the New Jersey (US) economy. In other words, the latter constituencies have avoided major pay cuts; they will have smaller pay cuts.

If this is all we were going to get--a boring, minute financial / bureaucratic adjustment that pushes us down the corporate food chain only by an inch--, I really don't understand why management had refused to negotiate since the spring of 2022, until April 2023. Why we have had to work without a contract since July 1, 2022. 

BTW, management would benefit from a catching-up course on the sociology of labor relations, especially the concept of social partnership. Mind you, there is nothing particularly progressive about that--but, even that corporatist-central European-conservative process is better for everyone than this hype, the drama, the threats, the surveillance, and, essentially, the absence of any significant gains for anyone.

For those expecting a step toward increasing the intellectual, social, mental and moral quality of higher education--well, that doesn't appear to have happened. The extent to which such an outcome is even possible under conditions of the contemporary, north American

1 corporate
2 neoliberal
3 core capitalism
4 on a global decline

--remains an open question, at least to me. I am not convinced this system is reformable . . . in its own terms (let alone considering the interests of humankind, etc.). It is sclerotic, to say the least.

For those of you outside the context of US academia, let alone Rutgers, please understand--contrary what you might experience in higher ed or the sciences elsewhere, be it in eastern Europe, or the Global South--this university is not suffering from financial shortages. Its President makes seven figures. Its "football" coach makes 4 MILLION USD and the salary of its basketball coach is 3.25 MILLION USD.  Per year. Even if their team loses. Even if it loses big-time. That's the power of the corporate entertainment industry over education and research.

The union has repeatedly shown that the university has significant padding in its budget. Pointed out specifically where the payments should come from. The total university budget is 5.1 BILLION USD. And, on top of it all, this is the university of the state of New Jersey, one of the most affluent states in the United States, perched on the east coast between New York City and Pennsylvania (NYC is of course currently the center of world capitalism, while the entire area is a highly industrialized, service-oriented, high-accumulation part of a core country in the world-economy), there are very significant resources that could be mobilized to make this university become more equitable and produce more social value--if somebody wanted to do so. Globally speaking, Rutgers is an extremely privileged university to work at. And, still--it won't be moved, not beyond a truly un-imaginative cost-of-living improvement and small tweaks on its glaringly unfair system.

Just my early reflections on Saturday morning. There is more but now I need to start my day.