Rebuttal to the Traverso speech before the Academic Senate, April 5, 2000 by Michael Ballou

Disclaimer: I'm directing my comments towards Everett, but only as he has represented the views of many. I have no personal animosity towards Everett. Indeed, he should be praised for having the guts to say openly what many of you say behind the scenes. He should also be praised or having some sense of morality. My own department threw any semblance of a moral code out the window and followed the faction who simply told Adjuncts (and I'm condensing two-years' worth of discussion here) "we've got it; we're going to keep it; screw you." Many other full-timers may have had their hearts with us. but when it cam time to vote, they closed ranks to protect their position of power, status and privilege.

Everett's argument last meeting can be distilled down to a few basic points: 1) that we are all victims on some level at SRJC and one group's "injustice" weighs no more nor less than another's 2) that Adjuncts are in some kind of apprentice teaching relationship for which we Adjuncts should be humbly grateful (and which, presumably, justifies our lower pay). 3) And finally, that the current situation is our of the full-timer's control.

Knowing how much Everett abhors "gross oversimplifications", let me address his points one by one. First, although there is surely injustice and unfairness elsewhere on campus, nothing comes close to the pay disparity of Adjuncts - 63.7¢ on the dollar hourly wage/40¢ when benefits are factored in. Full-timers, on the other hand, get everything. Indeed, the majority of you make more money doing absolutely nothing (your weekly 5-hour college service requirement) than most Adjuncts receive teaching two classes. Secondly, it will come as news to almost everyone that 1/3 of the classes at SRJC are taught by faculty who are "just practicing." Let's notify the Public Relations Department. Surely the people who determine our vaunted "fifth in the nation" status will want to know. How about all the Adjuncts who are now full-timers? Are they finished "practicing" and when did the metamorphosis take place? Adjuncts are not hired with "apprentice" qualifications nor are they hired with 36.3% fewer qualifications (60% fewer if benefits are factored in).

Finally, the situation is not beyond full-timers control. Indeed, isn't your current decision at hand (Adjuncts representation on the Academic Senate) a place to begin? How about the Academic Senate telling the AFA to stop foot dragging and stonewalling Adjunct issues on their piece of turf? How about forcefully telling Pres. Agrella to stop lobbying against Adjuncts? You know and I know that the deck is stacked against Adjuncts at eery level of campus government and you're complicit. Or how about just coming out of denial with yourself and helping other full-timers to do the same? You cannot hide behind Orwellian language, flimsy logic nor protestations of "morality." The facts of the matter are just too conspicuous. Furthermore, hiring more full-time faculty will only perpetuate the dynamics of the Academic underclass. As anyone who has looked at the situation will tell you, addressing Adjunct concerns is the place to begin. Finally, we really need to move beyond pro forma pleasantries of "better communication" and "equal respect". You need to throw Adjuncts bigger bones than these.

Up to this point I have used Everett's own words and reasoning in my rebuttal. but now let me interject some of my own. The more important dichotomy on this campus is not between part-timers and full-timers. It is between predatory hierarchy, i.e. elitism and Social Darwinism and social and political ecology, i.e. democracy, holistic think, systems theory. Whether you've noticed it or not ( and this is pur pedagogy), these philosophical issues have already been settled. There are no competitors or contenders to looking at natural or social processes as complete "systems". Many of you, however, still do not recognize the profound implications of this and that Social Darwinism has not so much as been vanquished as transcended. We now know more of how nature truly operates. Since societies invariably follow their natural world beliefs, we are in the midst of changing our social and political institutions accordingly. We humans can let go of the limited, tedious and primitive group mythos of "dog eat dog" belief systems that we have been stuttering over for so long. And we are under growing pressure to do so quickly as the true costs of predatory hierarchy are consipicuous everywhere. Clearly, the current pyramid scheme under which we live is bankrupt of ideas, vision and soul. So my friends, it seems obvious to me that "the jig is up." "We have seen the enemy and it is us." As Adjuncts break out of the artificial constructs of their own unique box, will the full-time faculty fund the will to break out of theirs?

I have no narrow self-interested agenda here as I plan on staying at SRJC just another few years. I'm too impatient for the glacial pace at which thnngs chnage around here and I've met other people in other places who want to move faster. Nor is social ecology a new battle cry or sham political justification for the dispossessed. I, personally, have no desire to wrest power or privilege from anyone's tight, fearful fingers. But for intelligence sake, I do strongly encourage you to give it up. This is your problem and you have a lot of educating to do among your colleagues. It's always a shock when the lion wakes up to find out he's just another piece of the ecosystem - no less important, but certainly no more. Just yesterday he was "King of the Jungle" and the top rung on the food chain. (All that work, all those soul-sucking compromises down the drain!!) Today with just a small tweaking of his awareness, he discovers he is and always has been a member of the chorus. Stupid lion for wanting to turn back now - there's so much more to be gained in community. He's not "bad" for continuing on in his predatory value-system, but make no mistake - he is stupid and limited.

It is to be expected that a college in the Bay area would be faced first with issues such as these. The "beast" was morphed, so to speak, into new clothing. So while the rest of the country is struggling over the acceptance of women, non-whites and gender identity, we're dealing with this latest incarnation of predatory hierarchy in the form of the exploitation of the part-time worker. Hopefully, you and the majority of full-timers will raise the standard one more notch and enfranchise another part of the SRJC community. If its any satisfaction, I think this may be the last piece of the puzzle since I can't imagine another form it could take. Your likely response to my pointed speed here may well be to attack the messenger - so go ahead; I'm not at fragile. Just leave time over for the message.

top of page