Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Ivoirians 2346 days ago
Here's my high level summary, as a former instructor.

1. Berkeley offered tuition remission as a benefit to grad student instructors essentially as a stipend/subsidy of living.

2. The union representing instructors negotiated tuition remission for undergrad instructors doing the same job as grad instructors, primarily to protect grad students from being short-changed by departments trying to hire cheaper undergrad instructors over the grad instructors who had greater need for the income.

3. CS class sizes increased, and the CS department lacked the funds to hire both enough grad and undergrad instructors to properly staff, so they offered 8-hour positions to undergrads as an alternative.

4. Undergrads were more than happy to take these positions, spend a few hours a week teaching, earn some income, and get close to professors. As 20-hour-a-week instructor, I still felt like it was an incredibly cushy and privileged job.

I wouldn't argue that the union is to blame here. It seems that only the CS department (as opposed to other departments) has hit this budgetary issue of being unable to afford enough instructors to staff its classes--the solution to me is that the university should look at the massive growth in the department and allot commensurate funding for instructors. Instead, the department took a (fairly reasonable) alternative solution which apparently has run afoul of some labor agreement.

Also, as someone who knows some instructors who stand to benefit from this decision: almost no one is happy about it. No one gains except these instructors--the department, future students, and future would-be instructors are all getting screwed (unless the department gets much more funding as a result of this).

2 comments

This is pretty accurate. The only part I don't really know anything about to confirm is the parts in #2 about the union doing that protecting grad students (I don't know the history). But it's a very accurate portrayal otherwise.
>Also, as someone who knows some instructors who stand to benefit from this decision: almost no one is happy about it. No one gains except these instructors--the department, future students, and future would-be instructors are all getting screwed (unless the department gets much more funding as a result of this).

This is just nonsense and is applicable to anything that takes money from the department. No, the department and future students wont be screwed because they have to pay back money.

To be more specific, they're being screwed because the department is now unable to add new (8hr) positions. Class size pressure will increase because the price of instructors has gone up, and fewer students will get to have cushy teaching jobs. The last point is what most of the former instructors feel: they felt privileged to work 8hr positions and now those opportunities are eliminated.