Becoming myparent’s parentOne CUNY faculty membertalks about caring for hismother – and the US healthcare system’s lack of support for our aging population. PAGE 10

On May 23, the PSC and CUNY management met to begin bargaining for a newUniversity-wide labor contract. The union presented its demands and the twosides discussed ground rules for the negotiations, with the next session set

for June 9. Complete text of the PSC’s demands, as unanimously adopted atthe May 1 Delegate Assembly, appears in a special four-page pullout in thisissue of Clarion. PAGE 3 & CENTER

Q & A on dental plan

WELFARE FUND

An update and details on thePSC-CUNY Welfare Fund’snew dental plan. What’s behind the changes, and how to get the most out of the new plan. PAGE 8

HEALTH CARE

●

AMERICAN ASSN. OF UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS ● AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS ● N.Y.C. CENTRAL LABOR COUNCIL ● N.Y.S. AFL-CIO ● N.Y. STATE UNITED TEACHERS

PSC rallies in Albany

BUDGET

Thousands demand an end to cuts in education, and help force an override ofPataki’s budget veto. But for CUNY, the result is amixed bag. PAGES 4–5 & 11

ClarıonNEWSPAPER OF THE PROFESSIONAL STAFF CONGRESS / CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK MAY/JUNE 2003

RF workers at Grad Center

want PSC

UNION VOTE

Research Foundationemployees file for a union election.

PAGE 3

Adjuncts and unemployment

BENEFITS

Should adjuncts file for unemployment benefitswhen they have no work during the summer? Coveryourself and check out your options. PAGE 9

PSC PRESENTS DEMANDS

BARGAININGBEGINSBARGAININGBEGINS

Gar

y Sc

hoic

het

● I write to recommend changes inthe way the Teachers’ RetirementSystem, the pension system formany us at CUNY, administers theTDA, ASF, and ITHP programs. TheTRS must allow members the flexi-bility to change future ITHP, ASF,and TDA allocations at any timeduring the year. Currently a mem-ber can only change the allocation offuture contributions during speci-fied months, although the changedoes not go into effect immediately.Such inflexibility does not occur inretirement accounts managed by Fi-delity or TIAA-CREF.

The TRS must also allow mem-bers more freedom in transferringfrom one fund to another past con-tributions and earnings. Currentlysuch a transfer can only be madeover the course of a year in one-month steps. This straitjacketing ofthe member’s retirement money hasbeen ridiculed in the civil servicenewspaper The Chief and is a sourceof discontent among TRS members.The current transfer system is ab-surdly archaic.

Irvin SchonfeldCity College

No unopposed slates● It is nearly impossible to success-fully run as the only independentcandidate in an election dominatedby the unopposed 25-member NewCaucus slate.

Notwithstanding this disability, Ichose to run for the position of Uni-versity-wide Officer and earned thevotes of 660 members who selectedeach candidate separately instead ofmerely placing a single “X” in theone slate box that appeared at thetop of the ballot.

For these votes I am most grate-ful, especially since they represent-ed approximately 18% of the effec-tive total vote count in this election(or nearly one out of each five votes).It is ironic that I received many more“non-slate” votes than any one of myfive New Caucus opponents – insome cases up to twice as many!

While this does not reward me avictory, it does point up the inherentunfairness of the unopposed slatevote when it is matched against asingle independent candidate.

Based upon this experience, Iwould propose the elimination of

unopposed slates in future PSC elec-tions whenever there are one ormore independent candidates. Sucha change in the election rules wouldencourage more independent candi-dates and thus lead to a more demo-cratic election.

Louis AlpertPSC EC member, 2000-2003

BCC

Adjunct unemployment● As a new adjunct grievance coun-selor for the PSC, I have heard a lotof calls from adjuncts regardingtheir eligibility for unemploymentinsurance (UI) for the summer.Their question turns upon whetheran adjunct is considered to be stillemployed after the Spring semester.The New York State Department ofLabor conducts hearings to deter-mine the issue.

The UI hearings between adjunctsand CUNY focus upon the “letter of reappointment” – a letter in theSpring from CUNY reassuring theadjunct of employment (e.g., acourse to teach) in the Fall, subject toseveral conditions (e.g., sufficient

registration). In UI hearings or othertribunals, this is generally referredto as a “letter of reassurance.”

Adjuncts who file for UI say thisletter is an illusory promise; CUNYsays the letter is given in good faith.Sometimes the adjuncts win; some-times CUNY wins. And sometimesthe decision is the result of a defaultby one party or the other (i.e., a de-cision based on one party’s failure toappear), creating mistaken expecta-tions about the outcome of future UIhearings.

What has been your experience?Write and tell me at Michael@Gregorek.com.

Michael J. GregorekCity College

Problem of 21st century ● It is amazing how relevant W.E.B.DuBois’s The Souls of Black Folkstill is today, 100 years after its pub-lication as a first-hand observationof African American life in thedecades following the Civil War. AnApril 7 celebration of the book’s100th anniversary, a benefit forTransAfrica Forum hosted by Grad-

uate Center’s Center for the Hu-manities, made clear how “the veil”described by DuBois still lingersover people of color, marking themoff from the white skin privilegegranted in our “democratic” society.

Actor Jeffrey Wright broke downwhile reading a passage from “Pass-ing of the First-Born,” Dubois’ ac-count of the death of his two-yearold son, a near-celebration of thechild’s escape from the veil, from thepath of disappointment that hadawaited his life. And when DannyGlover, chair of TransAfrica’sboard, read a passage about endlesswar still determined by the colorline, the audience murmured a quietrecognition. It is, indeed, still theproblem of the 21st century.

Glover closed the event with anexpression of concern, in the light ofthe current Iraq war, about possiblefuture attacks on oil-rich countrieson the African continent. One mightadd that the assault of malign ne-glect inflicted on this continent todate has been at least as deadly.

Renate BridenthalBrooklyn College (emerita)

2 NEWS & LETTERS Clarion | May/June 2003

TRS transfer system must change

Write to ClarionLetters should be no more than 150-200 words in length and are subjectto editing.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR | WRITE TO: CLARION/PSC, 25 W. 43RD STREET, FIFTH FLOOR, NEW YORK, NY 10036. E-MAIL: PHOGNESS@PSCMAIL.ORG. FAX: 212-302-7815.

By TOMIO GERON

PSC members at CUNY’s Universi-ty Applications Processing Center(UAPC) are in their fourth month ofnegotiations with management fora first-time contract. Meanwhile,workers say management has beencracking down on employees in re-taliation for their vote to join thePSC in an election last December.

In early January, managers be-gan to demand that workers keepdetailed logs of how theyspend the work day, includ-ing bathroom breaks. OneUAPC worker told of beingforced to count how manypages she processes eachhour, a tedious procedurethat she said actually slowsdown her work.

Other new policies since the elec-tion include a change from voluntaryto mandatory overtime, putting newrestrictions on use of vacation andsick time, and ending the past prac-tice of adjusting workers’ schedulesso that they could attend classes.

These unilateral changes are ille-gal, the PSC has charged: under the

National Labor Relations Act, anemployer cannot change terms andconditions of employment withoutnegotiating with the workers’ union.On April 22, the PSC filed an UnfairLabor Practice charge against theCUNY Research Foundation (RF),which manages the UAPC.

Incensed by management’s retal-iation, UAPC staff have also taken

direct action. On January9, about 50 employeesmarched into UAPC Ex-ecutive Director Les Ja-cobs’s office to deliver aletter protesting manage-ment’s sudden refusal toadjust work schedules toaccommodate classes and

the new work logs. Jacobs refusedto meet with the workers himself,but his representatives claimed thatthey did not know about the worklog requirement. Eventually thispractice was stopped, except in onedepartment.

Management has also imposednew quotas on how much work staff

must accomplish every day. “Super-visors are pushing for unreasonabledeadlines,” one UAPC worker toldClarion. Employees have beencalled for individual meetings withsupervisors about their productivi-ty. Supervisors of some depart-ments, such as programming, haverequired daily meetings with work-ers to push for higher output.

PRODUCTIVITY“They want you to increase pro-

ductivity, yet they don’t increaseyour pay,” said Robert Booras of theUAPC international department,noting the lack of cost-of-living in-creases for virtually all employees.“They’re harassing us,” he said.“That’s why 85% voted yes [to theunion].” On April 28, PSC membershand-delivered a letter to manage-ment protesting the new productiv-ity quotas, signed by 65 employees.

UAPC managers have also unfair-ly docked workers’ pay, according tothe Unfair Labor Practice complaint.Before the union election, employees

were docked 15 minutes of pay ifthey were 15 minutes late – but nowthe UAPC takes away one hour ofpay for 15 minutes of lateness.

Workers also face new restric-tions on how they can take vacation.The UAPC recently changed themaximum consecutive vacationtime an employee can take to twoweeks. “This is a change in termsand conditions of employment,” saidBooras. “In the past people couldtake three consecutive weeks.”Many PSC members at the UAPCare immigrants and in the past haveused three-week vacations to visitfamily in Africa, South America orEurope, trips they can afford onlyevery two or more years.

Management has also started re-quiring doctor’s notes for workerswho call in sick for just one day. Pre-

viously, a note was required onlywhen workers were sick for threedays or more.

Booras, who is also on the PSC negotiating team, said that the uni-lateral changes are retribution bymanagement for last December’svote. “Definitely, they are a punitiveresponse to the union,” he said.

The PSC’s Unfair Labor Practicecharge has gone to the National La-bor Relations Board, which is nowcollecting information on the case.

Meanwhile, negotiations for acontract continue and the union bar-gaining team reports slow progress.“It’s going well. It’s taking a littlelonger than I expected,” said Booras.“This is the first time we’re talkingto management on equal terms. It’sthe first time we can influence poli-cies that will affect us.”

UAPC workers fightunfair treatment

Diana Murakhovskaya, Bernadine Kamwanya and Neil Roberts at a recent lunch-time discussion with PSC officers.

Negotiations continue

Incensed bymanagement,UAPC staffhave alsotaken directaction.

Tom

io G

eron

By KRISTIN LAWLER

On May 16, CUNY Research Foun-dation employees who work at theUniversity’s Graduate Center fileda request for a union election withthe National Labor Relations Board.

A majority of Research Founda-tion (RF) workers at the GraduateCenter have declared their supportfor the PSC, and organizers expectthe upcoming election to be thenext victory for RF employeesacross CUNY who want union rep-resentation.

More than 200 people work on Re-search Foundation lines at the Grad-uate Center. Most of them do re-search and administrative supportfor grant-funded projects of everyacademic stripe. A significant num-ber work at the Graduate Center onjobs not directly funded by grants.Many are CUNY graduate students.

Tuition reimbursement, job secu-rity, and greater leverage in dealingwith the Research Foundation top

the list of demands animating theorganizing drive. “We are organiz-ing because a collective voice willmake the RF accountable to itsworkers,” says Ron Nerio, a Ph.D.candidate in sociology and a grant-funded employee. “I hope tuition re-mission is something that we canachieve.”

TEMPORARY?Because grants are limited in du-

ration, all grant-funded employeesare considered “temporary” – eventhose whose grants are renewedregularly or those who work foryears in Graduate Center adminis-trative offices. Building protectionsfor this kind of so-called temporaryemployment is a priority for GradCenter workers – protections suchas severance packages, a senioritysystem that could help those on de-funded grants find new jobs, and

cushions to protect benefits be-tween projects.

Many of the RF employees pointout that other workers on campusenjoy the rights and protections thatcome with a union; they saythe PSC has always been apositive force at the Gradu-ate Center. “We’re excitedto be joining the same unionthat many of our colleaguesbelong to,” says ThurstonDomina, a researcher andgraduate student in sociolo-gy who belongs to the orga-nizing committee. “By join-ing together, we hope to improvenot only the quality of our jobs butalso the quality of our research, byimproving communication with theRF and negotiating away organiza-tional hurdles.”

Frances Fox Piven, distinguishedprofessor of political science at the

Grad Center, put it this way: “AllCUNY workers, whether they aregraduate students, researchers, oradministrators, need and deserve aunion to protect their rights in the

workplace.” In the next few weeks,

workers and managementwill discuss what jobswould be included in thebargaining unit – and thuswho gets to vote. Organiz-ers hope this phase willmove quickly and that anelection will be scheduledin the near future. “The

sooner the better,” says HillaryWebb, a researcher and union ac-tivist. “Research Foundation work-ers here are ready to be members ofthe PSC.”

Apparently they’re not alone.“The PSC has been receiving callsfrom all over CUNY,” says Mary

Ann Carlese, the union’s AssociateExecutive Director. “There are near-ly 7,000 CUNY employees paid onResearch Foundation lines. They’reexpressing a lot of interest in havingPSC representation and a strong,fair contract.”

SHADOW WORKThey deserve it, says PSC Presi-

dent Barbara Bowen. “The RF ispart of CUNY’s vast ‘shadow uni-versity,’” Bowen says. “Thousandsof unorganized workers do teach-ing, research, and program develop-ment – often exactly the same workas unionized PSC members – butwithout the protection of a unioncontract. It’s time for this gross in-equity to end.”

The PSC has represented work-ers at the RF’s central office since1973. And in a December 2002 elec-tion, 85% of RF employees atCUNY’s University ApplicationsProcessing Center voted to unionizewith the PSC.

By TOMIO GERON

The PSC and CUNY managementopened negotiations for a new laborcontract on May 23. The PSC pre-sented its demands and the twosides discussed ground rules forbargaining.

“Even in a tough fiscal climate, thePSC believes that investment in ourprofessional lives must continue ifCUNY is to thrive,” said PSC Presi-dent Barbara Bowen, the union’schief negotiator. “The union seeks tocontinue the progress we’ve made inrestoring salaries, improving work-place conditions and rebuilding theUniversity. Much more remains tobe done, and we are ready for seri-ous and productive negotiations.”

RESEARCH AND DISCUSSIONThe negotiations follow months of

research by PSC negotiators anddiscussion among union members.The PSC’s demands were approvedby the Executive Council on March6 and presented to the Delegate As-sembly (DA) two weeks later.

Delegates had a month to reviewthe proposals and made a number ofsuggestions that were incorporatedinto the document. With thesechanges, the demands were adoptedby a unanimous vote at the DA’sMay 1 meeting. (The full text ap-pears in a special pullout section inthe center of this issue of Clarion.)

The union’s demands emphasizethe need for more progress toward

nationally competitive salaries andoutline several ways to addressCUNY’s heavy teaching load. Anumber of proposals aim at winningequity for adjuncts, Higher Educa-tion Officers (HEOs) and CollegeLab Technicians (CLTs), library andcounseling faculty, and those inContinuing Education and the Edu-cational Opportunity Centers.

Other items address CUNY’s pay-

ments to the Welfare Fund, promo-tions, care for family members,health and safety, intellectual prop-erty and more.

PSC members had a chance todiscuss the contract proposals di-rectly with the union negotiatingteam in a May 12 open meeting heldat Baruch College. Several mem-bers stressed the importance ofwinning equal treatment for library

faculty in reassigned time and sum-mer leave. “I do not yet havetenure,” said Miriam Laskin of theHostos library. “If I had a regularfaculty schedule, I would have a lotmore time to do my research andpublishing. I think this iscrucial for librarians,” shesaid to strong applause.

Lorraine Cohen, co-chair ofthe PSC Women’s Commit-tee, suggested that such in-equities in time and leavemay stem in part from gen-der discrimination. “Howmany of the library and coun-seling faculty are women?”Cohen asked. “Does thathave anything to do with thefact that these groups havebeen under attack ever sinceI came to CUNY?” She invited library and counseling faculty to join the Women’s Committee intrying to answer these questions.(To contact the Women’s Commit-tee, e-mail Norah Chase at nchase@kbcc.cuny.edu, or call 212-354-1252.)

DISTANCE LEARNINGAt the May 1 DA, Greg Dunkel, a

HEO at the CUNY Computer Center,linked the demand for protectionagainst excessive workload forHEOs with CUNY’s introduction ofnew educational technology. “Thisis going to be a key issue, becausethere will be a major expansion ofdistance learning in this Universi-ty,” Dunkel said. “This will have a

big effect on HEOs, and I’m speakingas one who works 40 to 50 hours aweek.”

Agreement on a new contract isnot likely to come quickly, given the unsettled condition of both City

and State finances. CUNYmanagement’s negotiat-ing team is directly ac-countable to ChancellorMatthew Goldstein andthe CUNY Board ofTrustees, but any settle-ment will also need thebacking of New York Cityand State, which providemost of CUNY’s funding.

Most other municipalunions have not yet begunto bargain seriously fornew contracts. Mayor

Bloomberg’s demand for $600 mil-lion in concessions and his call for“productivity” to fund wage in-creases have acted as roadblocks inmunicipal labor negotiations.

At the May 12 meeting, PSC FirstVice President Steve London askedmembers to get involved in pushingfor the best possible contract.“What we’re putting on this page iswhat we believe we deserve andwhat our members have told us isimportant,” said London. “I can’tpromise that we will win on everypoint. But I can promise that we willfight very hard – and if we fightwith 20,000 members, then we willwalk away with a lot of our de-mands in the new contract.”

Clarion | May/June 2003 NEWS 3

Majority of RF employees back PSC

PSC presents demands

Ching-Leou Liu, a library faculty member at Hostos, speaks at the May 12 mem-bership meeting at Baruch.

Gar

y Sc

hoic

het

Grad Center workers want union

The unionseeks torestoresalaries,improveworkplaceconditionsand rebuildtheUniversity.

Contract negotiations begin

Nearly 7,000workers atCUNY arepaid onResearchFoundationlines.

The City budget was still up in theair at the end of May, leaving resi-dents wondering about everythingfrom their children’s schools to thelocal firehouse to the pungent odorof garbage in the summertime.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg has al-ready laid off over 2,000 city work-ers, including drug addic-tion counselors, fostercare caseworkers, sanita-tion workers and home-less shelter staff.

Earlier in the month theState Legislature passed aseries of measures that will plug $2.7billion of the $3.8 billion hole in theCity budget. The package includes arise in the City’s sales tax, a City in-come tax surcharge for individualsearning over $100,000, and a Statetakeover of $500 million a year inCity debt service from the 1970s.The day after he vetoed the Statebudget, Governor Pataki vetoed theCity aid package as “another multi-million-dollar tax grab,” but on May19 both houses of the Legislaturevoted for an override.

Bloomberg set aside plans for a“doomsday budget” with layoffs of

10,500 municipal workers, which hesaid would have been necessary ifthe State aid had not come through.But Bloomberg moved ahead withover 4,000 layoffs that he insistedwere necessary to fill the City’s re-maining budget gap. Over 2,000 cityworkers found themselves jobless

on May 17, with the restslated to be axed incoming weeks.

Bloomberg rejectedan appeal from the Mu-nicipal Labor Commit-tee (MLC) to “stop the

clock” on the layoffs while negotiat-ing over the MLC’s cost-saving pro-posals. The City and the MLC(which includes the PSC) sat downto discuss the union plan on May 15– but the next day City representa-tives walked away from the table,and the layoffs went ahead.

MAYOR’S DEMANDSFor months the mayor has de-

manded $600 million in immediatemoney-saving concessions fromCity unions, including longer workhours, increased health care pay-ments, cuts in vacation days and re-

duced pension benefits for new em-ployees. The MLC countered withits own proposals to save moneythrough early retirement incentives,a stretchout of City pension plancontributions, $100 million in health

care savings and a $200 million loanthat the Daily News said would be“virtually interest-free.”

The City rebuffed the MLC pro-posals out of hand, claiming thatthey were worth a mere $20 millionin real savings instead of the $600million asserted by the MLC.

But when the MLC proposed thatthe real value of its plan be assessedby a three-member panel – StateComptroller Alan Hevesi, CityComptroller William Thompson anda third person named by the mayor– City representatives said theyweren’t interested.

Those targeted for the next waveof layoffs include almost 1,000teacher’s aides in the public schools.Two-thirds of teacher’s aides areAfrican American or Latino, and theUnited Federation of Teachers hasfiled a lawsuit charging that the cut-back plan has a disproportionate im-pact along racial lines.

CUNY FUNDSWhile the drama of the layoffs

held center stage, the City CouncilHigher Education Committee heldhearings on Bloomberg’s proposedbudget for CUNY for the 2003-2004fiscal year. The mayor has proposedmaintaining direct City support forCUNY at its current level of $124million, essentially doing the mini-mum required by the State’s “main-tenance of effort” law for fundingCUNY’s community colleges.

However, Bloomberg has onceagain proposed elimination of thePeter F. Vallone Scholarship Pro-gram, which provides $5.5 million intuition aid for NYC high schoolgraduates who maintain at least a Baverage at CUNY. Last year moneyfor the scholarships was restored bythe City Council, in large part due tolobbying by PSC members.

The mayor also wants to slash$124,000 from the Hunter CampusElementary and High Schools andanother $2.7 million from CUNY’sadult literacy efforts and variousUniversity administrative costs.

The Council will vote on the bud-get sometime in June. –TG

By TOMIO GERON

While CUNY won some reprievesfrom the State budget axe in May,the University is still being hit witha drop in State support and a steeptuition increase.

The budget passed by the StateLegislature reverses Governor Pata-ki’s proposal to cut community col-lege base aid by $345 per full-timeequivalent student. Because of in-creased enrollment, this means

State support for CUNY’s communi-ty colleges will rise 3.5% to $135.9million, a $4.6 million increase overthe last fiscal year. The final budgetalso overturns the deep cuts Patakiproposed for the Tuition AssistanceProgram (TAP), which helps publicand private university studentsstatewide.

CUNY’s senior colleges, however,

have been cut by $83.1 million(12.5%) compared to last fiscal year.To close the gap, the Legislature’splan proposes – in effect requires –raising “tuition and other revenue”by $121.5 million. This means impos-ing a tuition hike at CUNY seniorcolleges of up to $950 per year for in-state residents and nearly $5,000 forthose from out of state.

“We are pleased with the restora-tions to the community college bud-get and opportunity programs andTAP,” said PSC Secretary and Leg-islative Director Cecelia McCall.“However, we are extremely unhap-py that there is no restoration to thesenior college budget. We do not feela tuition increase at CUNY is arestoration.”

TUITION HIKEEven before this increase, New

York’s public colleges were the 14thmost expensive in the country. Overthe past nine years, Pataki has pro-posed $2.4 billion in cuts to collegesand universities, and CUNY hasseen its State support decline byover 40% since 1990. Earlier this

year, a study by researchers at Illi-nois State University found thatNew York spends less on publichigher education than 46 otherstates, in proportion to per capita in-come.

CUNY Chancellor Matthew Gold-stein has opposed a $950 tuition in-crease as too costly, and has said hewill aim for a lower figure. CUNY of-ficials have not commented onwhether they will raise tu-ition at community col-leges. A tuition increase forCUNY graduate programsis also possible.

The State budget forCUNY is part of an Assem-bly-Senate budget passedover Pataki’s vocal objec-tions. Unable to reachagreement with the gover-nor on how to cover an $11.5 billionbudget gap, the Legislature crafteda budget of its own. While the gov-ernor was willing to increase salestaxes, raise CUNY and SUNY tuitionand introduce new forms of gam-bling, he dug in his heels against anytax increase on upper-income NewYorkers.

Pataki’s May 14 veto thus led tothe extraordinary sight of Senate

Majority Leader Joe Bruno, a Re-publican and close Pataki ally, join-ing with Assembly Speaker SheldonSilver in an override vote. It was Al-bany’s first override of a budget ve-to since 1982.

SALES AND INCOME TAXThe Legislature’s budget mea-

sures include a 0.25% rise in theState sales tax and an income tax

surcharge on individualsearning over $100,000 ayear. A total of $1.9 billionwas restored to Medicaidand education funding.

Unions have been activein the campaign to restorefunding to State services –rallying in Albany (see fac-ing page), lobbying, andripping Pataki in television

ads. The efforts seem to have madean impact, helping stave off many ofthe proposed cuts.

Pataki’s approval ratings droppedto 37% – almost his lowest ever – asthe budget crisis came to a head, ac-cording to a Marist College poll inMay. Voters said they were againstPataki’s handling of budget issues,with 56% opposing his veto and only26% backing the move.

4 NEWS Clarion | May/June 2003

Mayor rebuffs union plan to avoid layoffs

City budget still short

As many as 30,000 people attended an April 29 rally against city budget cuts spon-sored by DC 37, the union that is most heavily affected by city layoffs.

Senior colleges cut 12.5%

PSC members attended a May 3 Albany rally in support of public education funding.

State budget mixed for CUNY

The adoptedbudgetmeans a$950 seniorcollegetuition hikeis possible.

CUNY funding ismaintained, butscholarshipsare threatened.

Pete

r Hog

ness

Pete

r Hog

ness

By CLARION STAFF

On May 3, thousands of peoplecame to Albany to demand supportfor public education, from pre-Kthrough post-grad. Opposing thedeep cuts proposed in GovernorPataki’s budget, they filled the plazain front of the State Capitol.

“Look around you,” PSC Presi-dent Barbara Bowen told protesters.“This is what power looks like! Let’smake this the beginning of a peo-ple’s movement to reverse the his-tory of inadequate and unequalfunding of education in this state.”

The protest was organized by abroad coalition of teacher unions, lo-cal school boards, PTAs, college stu-dent clubs and community groupslike ACORN and the Campaign forFiscal Equity. New York State Unit-ed Teachers (NYSUT), the PSC’sstate affiliate, played a central role.

UPSTATE & DOWN“We were all there for the same

reason,” said Terry Parker, a CLT inthe library at LaGuardia Communi-ty College. “People from upstate andfrom downstate, and that was good.It felt like being part of history – youfelt lucky to be there.” For severalstudents on the LaGuardia bus, itwas their first demonstration; theytold Parker it made them want tocome to more.

Scott Dexter is an assistant pro-fessor in computer science at Brook-lyn College. When asked why he’dcome to Albany, he said, “I’m teach-ing intro courses this year, and I’dlike to see those students come

back. One of my students is on thisbus and he’s totally TAP. With a tu-ition increase, it’s going to be hardfor him to stay in school.”

Also on the Brooklyn College buswas Yvonne Armstrong of theNAACP’s NY branch. “The CentralLabor Council told us about the ral-ly,” she said, “and we came for thechildren in the public schools. InNYC now, the system is in disarray.”

Hundreds of buses converged onAlbany, including 16 from the PSC.With the demonstration coming atthe end of the semester, chapters of-

ten found that mobilizing was achallenge. The most successful wasprobably City Tech, which sent acontingent of 90 people.

ACTIVISTS GET THE CREDIT“I was stunned when I saw the

numbers,” said PSC Chapter ChairBob Cermele. “I wish I could takepersonal credit, but I can’t. We hadsome very active activists in thecontinuing ed division who reallyturned people out.”

NYSUT put the entire crowd at40,000, and it was one of the largest

that many politicians present hadever addressed. The timing was ide-al, coming just after the State Legis-lature had voted for a budget restor-ing many of Pataki’s cuts, but beforethe governor’s veto (see p. 4).

Terry Parker said that the timingand the turnout had a real impact.“When I left Albany, I was wonder-ing if the legislators would followthrough on their credo of a veto, be-cause politicians never followthrough on their promises,” he said.“But they did. I think we got them todo what was right.”

By MICHAEL McKEE Tenants & Neighbors and PETER HOGNESS

CUNY faculty and staff are caught inthe scissors between sub-standardsalaries and New York City’s sky-high housing prices. The cost ofhousing in NYC is a key obstacle torecruiting new faculty, and manyPSC members are only able to live inthe city thanks to rent regulation.

Tenant groups estimate that over4,500 PSC members live in buildingswith rent stabilization or rent con-trol, and State rent laws are due toexpire at midnight on June 15.

But a simple renewal of the lawsin their current state would meanthe continuing phaseout of rent reg-ulation and its eventual demise.Every year more units are removedfrom rent regulation through vari-ous loopholes. If the laws are notstrengthened, there will be fewer

and fewer regulated tenants – andeventually tenants will not have thepolitical power to renew rent andeviction protections.

SPIRITED RALLYOn May 13 in Albany, tenants

from across the state rallied to de-mand tougher legislation. “We hada spirited rally,” said Arlene Geiger,an adjunct at John Jay, who wasone of thousands wearing yellowcaps that said Stronger Rent LawsNow! “It’s vital we pass strongerrent laws,” said Geiger, “becausewe’re hemorrhaging hundreds ofapartments by the year.”

The number one goal of tenants,unions and community activists isthe repeal of “vacancy decontrol.”This has become a way for land-lords to take their apartments out

of rent regulation forever, often by subjecting tenants to illegal pres-sure to move. These units then become unaffordable tomost renters.

The pro-tenant coalitionalso wants the rent lawschanged to cover Mitchell-Lama rental buildings firstoccupied after 1973 andproject-based Section 8buildings, if the landlordopts out of either program.Without these changes, tenants inthese buildings can face immediatedisplacement.

Another loophole, high-incomedecontrol, kicks in if a regulatedrent goes over $2,000 and tenantsearn above a certain threshold. Ithas resulted in the decontrol of veryfew apartments, but creates enor-

mous fear among tenants. It doesnothing to increase the supply of af-fordable housing, but rather resultsin rents that only rich people can af-ford. Short of repeal, tenant groupswant this provision modified and ad-justed for inflation, with elderly anddisabled tenants exempted.

Today rent increases for building-wide Major Capital Improvementsare permanent and compoundedwith base rent. This can mean stag-

gering run-ups of rents injust a few years, helpinglandlords jack up the rent tothe $2,000 decontrol thresh-old. Bills now in the Legisla-ture would change these intotemporary rent surcharges.

Tom Waters of Tenants &Neighbors urged PSC mem-bers to call their legislators

before June 15. “Tell them a simplerenewal of current laws is unaccept-able,” he said. “Even pro-tenant leg-islators need to hear this.” For an up-date, check with Tenants & Neigh-bors at tenantsandneighbors.org or(212) 608-4320, or Met Council onHousing at www.metcouncil.net or(212) 979-0611.

Clarion | May/June 2003 NEWS 5

Stronger rent laws or none at all?

Simplerenewalwould meana phaseoutof rentregulations.

Battle over rent rules

Labor board upholds PSC’s right to represent The PSC recently settled two Pub-lic Employment Relations Boardcharges against the Manhattan Ed-ucational Opportunity Center(MEOC) and Hostos CommunityCollege. In both cases, the PSC stat-ed that management had illegallyattempted to intimidate PSC mem-bers while they were representingother workers. When the Directorof the MEOC spoke to PSC ChapterChair Gene Plunkett about a griev-ance the PSC had filed, she threat-ened to close evening classes at theMEOC, which would result in 10employees losing their jobs. She al-so directed personal insults atPlunkett. In the other case, RalphRanald, a grievance counselor, wasrepresenting Hostos faculty in agrievance hearing when FranklinPerez, representing the Hostos ad-ministration, personally insultedRanald and Chapter Chair NormaPeña de Llorenz and threatened toterminate Ranald’s sick leave. Insigning the agreements, CUNY rec-ognizes the PSC’s right under theTaylor Law to vigorously repre-sent its members in grievances andto engage in protected activity.

Award nixedDean Kristin Booth Glen of theCUNY School of Law rejected stu-dents’ selection of Lynne Stewartto receive the school’s Public Inter-est Lawyer of the Year Award atgraduation. In an e-mail to stu-dents, Glen argued that the school’sfunding could be threatened by thechoice of Stewart, who has been in-dicted on federal charges of aidingterrorism while representingSheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, nowserving a life sentence for plottingto bomb the United Nations. Manycivil liberties lawyers have criti-cized Stewart’s indictment as an at-tack on the ability of attorneys torepresent unpopular clients. TheNY Law Journal reported that in alater meeting with students, Glensaid conversations with CUNYTrustees had led her to be con-cerned that the law school mighteven be shut down. After a petitionfrom 73 students did not changeGlen’s mind, graduates honoredStewart in a private ceremony.

Mayor vs. welfare bill Mayor Bloomberg filed a lawsuitchallenging the legality of a CityCouncil welfare-education billpassed last month. The bill, Intro93-A, would allow people receivingpublic assistance easier access totraining and education, includingcourses at CUNY. The lawsuit, filedin State Supreme Court on May 8,argues that the bill usurps controlfrom the Human Resources com-mission and conflicts with stateand federal laws.

CUNYIN BRIEFMay 3 rally in Albany

The PSC contingent carried signs that read, “Invest in CUNY, Invest in New York.”

Pete

r Hog

ness

By HILARY RUSS

In the late 1960s, Harold Wilsongrabbed CUNY Legislative Confer-ence Chair Belle Zeller and practi-cally pinned her up against a wall.“Look what we’re making!” he demanded, brandishing a list of the low salaries that he and fellowCollege Laboratory Techniciansearned and comparing it to whatprofessors were bringing in. “Wecan’t live on this money!”

That’s how retired CLT EzraSeltzer recalls it, and the incidentsticks in his mind both because Wil-son and Zeller were friendly and be-cause Wilson almost never raisedhis voice.

HARD-NOSED GENTLEMANZeller was not one to shrink from

an argument – but she had to con-cede that Wilson had a point. TheLegislative Conference, one of twogroups that later merged to form thePSC, made the issue a priority, andSeltzer says the beleaguered techni-cians won a hefty pay increase. Itwas this kind of well-timed tenacitythat helped an otherwise gentle-manly, private man play a pivotalrole in the history of the PSC.

Wilson was 90 years old when hedied April 9 from heart failure inBergenfield, NJ, where he had livedfor some 30 years. “I think his sys-tem was just plain worn out,”

laments his 58-year-old son Paul, aretired CLT from Baruch who nowworks part-time in the biology de-partment at City Tech. Besides be-ing a devoted father, says Paul,Harold Wilson was “a confidant anda role model and a good friend.”

Born in the shipbuilding town ofBarrow-in-Furness, England, Wil-son witnessed German dirigiblesfloat overhead on spying and bomb-ing missions in WWI. During a pro-longed economic depression in theearly 1920’s, his parents moved thefamily to the United States. His fa-ther was a union man who workedon the Independent (IND) subwayline in New York. Harold eventuallybecame a chemistry lab technicianat the campus that later becameBaruch, setting up and breaking

down laboratories and preparinglecture hall demonstrations.

Wilson’s contributions to theunion were singular. In the 1950s,the Legislative Conference (LC)pressed for higher salaries and pen-sions on behalf of full-time faculty atthe four “city colleges” – Brooklyn,City, Hunter and Queens. Not every-one believed that non-classroomprofessionals such as techniciansshould be included at the bargainingtable, but to Wilson this was essen-tial. In the mid-1950s, “Harold wasthe basic force behind the foundingof the first CLT chapter,” recalls Ir-win Yellowitz, chair of the PSC Re-tirees Chapter and president of theNY Labor History Association. Wil-son headed the LC’s section forCLTs, originally called College Sci-ence Associates, until 1972.

A SINGLE UNIONThat year the LC merged with an

AFT local, the United Federation ofCollege Teachers, to form the PSC.Even then, the University and manyemployees opposed bringing CLTsand other non-teaching instruction-

al staff into the same union as facul-ty. Management called CLTs “bot-tle-washers,” according to formerPSC President Irwin Polishook.

Once again, says Yellowitz,“Harold Wilson was the one who ar-gued that they should be together toform a much stronger union.” Wil-son became the PSC’s vice presidentfor cross-campus units, where herepresented all non-faculty profes-sional staff. “He did a lot for every-body,” notes Seltzer, “but he lovedus best.” Wilson was “Mister CLT,”says Bob Wurman, a recently re-tired CLT from Queens.

Wilson “had a silver tongue, andnever shied away from a confronta-tion,” recalls retired CLT Ray Key-work. “He instilled in a lot of peoplea deep loyalty.”

Colleagues remember Wilson as asteadfast and diplomatic negotiator.At the bargaining table, “he wouldhold onto certain principles, but hewas flexible in terms of strategy andtactics,” says Yellowitz. He alsohelped form the PSC’s first healthand safety committee. “We got callsfrom all over the country [asking]how they could organize safety andhealth,” remembers CLT ChapterSecretary Randy Smith.

In fact, Wilson’s efforts stretchedbeyond CUNY. In the 1970s, he wassent to California with Zeller to orga-nize the Cal State system for theAFT. The National Education Asso-ciation had a strong foothold andproved hard to beat; in the end theAFT lost the election. But Wilson andZeller “were magnificent out there,”Seltzer says. “It was a long shot, andthey made the election close. Nobodythought they had a chance.”

Wilson remained active at thePSC until he retired in the mid-1980s.“He loved the work,” recalls Seltzer.“Not only was Harold a great speak-er, he wrote – memos, reports, let-ters – to so many people, and he didit almost alone.” Wilson played acrucial and sometimes unacknowl-edged role, Seltzer says: “Withouthim, we would have been lost.”

Harold Wilson remembered

By BONNIE R. NELSONJohn Jayand PETER HOGNESS

CUNY libraries are funded at lessthan half of the national averageand less than a third of the averagefor New York State, according todata from the National Center forEducational Statistics. Libraries atCUNY also get significantly lessmoney than those at SUNY, on av-erage receiving about two-thirds asmuch per student.

For all CUNY campuses, includ-ing the Graduate Center, mean li-brary expenditure per full timeequivalent student (FTE) was $261for Fiscal Year 2000. The averagefigure for all SUNY cam-puses was $403, while thenational average for allacademic institutions was$528. The average for allcolleges and universitiesin New York State was much higher– $876 per FTE.1

What this means for CUNY li-brary users is unavailable booksand journals, insufficient staff and alack of development of electronic re-sources. “I haven’t been able to buyany sociology books for two years,”said Richard Uttich, chief of publicservices at the City College library.“We did not have enough money tobuy both the books and journals

that we need. We chose to keep ourjournals, because the articles aremore current.” Last year, he said,the CCNY library spent about$750,000 on print and electronic jour-nals and about $50,000 on books.None of the book money came fromtax-levy funds.

Faced with such financial pres-sures, there are no good decisions.“Sometimes CUNY libraries havestopped subscribing to periodicals,”said Susan O’Malley, chair of theUniversity Faculty Senate. “So ifyou go to the Hunter library, for ex-ample, there’ll be a whole set of

years for which some-thing is not available be-cause they couldn’t keepup the subscription.”

“Information is a ne-cessity, not a luxury,”

commented Susan Vaughn, the Uni-versity’s director of electronic col-lection development. For CUNY tobe a “major player” in academic re-search, she said, it must have well-funded libraries. Without them,CUNY’s faculty and students simplycannot do their work.

Average library spending forCUNY’s senior colleges and theGraduate Center was $297 per FTE,less than half of the $674 average at

SUNY’s 4-year liberal arts colleges(such as SUNY-Old Westbury) anddoctoral institutions (such as SUNY-Buffalo). In other words, libraries atthese CUNY schools got 44% asmuch money per student as theirupstate and suburban counterparts.

The Graduate Center library hadthe highest FTE expenditure withinCUNY, at $485. But this is still lessthan half of the $1,052 average fordoctoral institutions at SUNY, andonly 53% of the national average fordoctorate-granting institutions.2

DISCREPANCYThe discrepancy between

CUNY’s community colleges andthose outside NYC is not as severe,but is still pronounced – libraryspending per FTE was $160 atCUNY’s two-year schools, about 70%of the amount for SUNY communitycolleges ($232) or for community col-leges in the US as a whole ($227). ButCUNY’s community college facultydo far more research than those attwo-year schools nationally andmany more of them hold Ph.D.s;thus, this understates the shortfallfor CUNY’s community colleges.

There are differences amongCUNY schools as well. Senior col-leges range from City Tech ($147) and

John Jay ($179) at the bottom to CC-NY ($455) and Lehman ($407) at thetop. Community colleges at CUNYrange from BMCC’s average of $114to LaGuardia’s $216. All, however, arestill far below comparable averagesfor SUNY or for the US as a whole.

“What’s happened is that whencollege presidents don’t have enoughmoney, they often take it out of thelibraries and give them less than theyear before,” said UFS Chair O’Mal-ley. “One of the things we’d like to dois get library funding in the capitalbudget.”

PSC Secretary Cecelia McCalltold Clarion, “The data show thatboth CUNY and SUNY are under-funded in this area. This is one moreexample of a crucial need that is be-ing shortchanged by budget cuts in

public higher education.” McCallnoted that, “Local decisions on li-brary funding are clearly being in-fluenced by the size of the pie.”

1) Expenditure per FTE includes spending onbooks, serials and electronic resources, staff andequipment. CUNY averages do not include BrooklynCollege, Hostos or BCC, for which data were un-available. All figures based on data for FY2000, themost recent available from NCES, through the Aca-demic Library Peer Analysis Tool, available on theWeb at nces.ed.gov/surveys/libraries/.

NCES survey data reported by libraries do notusually include library resources purchased by sep-arately funded state or local consortia. Thus the$793,118 of electronic resources purchased centrallyfor all CUNY libraries in 2002/2003 is not included. Ifit were, it would add $5.24 to the mean FTE expendi-ture for CUNY as a whole.

2) If SUNY’s two Health Science Centers are ex-cluded, the SUNY doctoral average is $753, still farabove the average for the CUNY Grad Center (GC).

For CUNY, the combined average for senior col-leges and the GC is probably a better measure of re-sources available to graduate programs. Many ofCUNY’s 31 doctoral programs are based on seniorcollege campuses and rely on their library resources.

6 NEWS Clarion | May/June 2003

OUR HISTORY

“Mr. CLT” and the formation of the PSC

Library funding gapCUNY facilities get much less

Harold Wilson (right) with Ezra Seltzer

“Information isa necessity,not a luxury.”

Library expenditures per FTE student

Sour

ce: N

atio

nal C

ente

r for

Edu

catio

n St

atis

tics,

dat

a fo

r FY2

000.

With these demands for collectivebargaining, the PSC inaugurates itsnew campaign to restore the Uni-versity – and our own lives asCUNY faculty and staff – throughthe contract. The last round of col-lective bargaining saw a conceptualbreakthrough: the idea that the contract could be an instrument forrebuilding the University. Now theunion seeks to further that break-through and usher in other long-term improvements, while also ad-dressing growing areas of crisis inour professional lives.

You’ll see familiar subjects in the seventy demands that follow –salary increases, competitive work-loads, equity for part-timers, im-proved grievance procedures – andthe union’s commitment to them re-mains intense. Fair salaries are thekeystone of the contract, and thecurrent demands seek to continuethe restoration of CUNY salaries be-gun in the last agreement. CUNYhas historically attracted some ofthe best scholars in the country,drawn by its vibrancy, mission andlocation. If this history is to contin-ue, our contracts must continue toundo the salary erosion of pastdecades.

But there are also new emphasesin the proposals below. For the lastsix months, the negotiating team hasbeen listening to members as youhave spoken in various forumsabout your most urgentneeds. Several new con-cerns emerged from themembership survey, includ-ing a focus on job security,an urgency about preserv-ing professional autonomy,a strong vote for added benefits funding. All ofthose areas are reflectedhere. Members also spokeabout the need to consoli-date the gains of the last contractand extend them to groups for whomthey were not achieved last time.You’ll see evidence of that approachin several of the demands below.

SALARIES AND MORETwo themes dominated your re-

sponses to the question of the nextcontract: first, support for the ap-proach the union took last time –combining across-the-board salaryincreases with equity adjustmentsand structural change; second, agrowing sense of alarm about theabsence of professional conditions

at CUNY that are routine at compa-rable universities. The negotiatingteam heard your concerns, and, as aresult, this new set of demandsgives special attention to issues

such as the right to paidleave to care for a newchild or other familymember, the health andsafety of our workplaces,the dangerous decline instudents’ access to coun-selors, the provision oftuition waivers for em-ployees and their fami-lies. The demands alsodevelop a blueprint for

achieving a competitive workload –including reduced class size and real sabbaticals – and propose a fairapproach to faculty and staff rightsto their own intellectual property.

As you read through the de-mands, you’ll see that they are or-ganized by contractual area ratherthan by constituency; the demandsfor any one group, such as HEOs orfull-time faculty, appear in severalsections. You may also feel thatsome of the demands are only thebeginning of a longer discussion ofan issue; keep in mind that behindeach of these demands are hours of

research and elaboration by the ne-gotiating team, on which we willdraw at the bargaining table.

This list is shorter and more fo-cused than the one we took to theprevious round of negotiations, butstill transformative for the Univer-sity. In approving this set of de-mands, the union’s Delegate As-sembly made a commitment to aserious agenda for bargaining, onethat balances the urgent concerns ofmany parts of our membership. Weapproach this set of negotiations asa union, in which our ability to rep-resent the entire membership cre-ates our greatest source of strength.

WITHIN REACHNo one would deny that the cur-

rent (politically created) fiscal cli-mate makes this a difficult time toopen negotiations. But a solution tothe budget constraints is withinreach, if City Hall and Albany havethe political will to restore revenuelost through billions of dollars of taxcuts over the last few years. ThePSC joins unions around the statein insisting that public employeesnot take the brunt of fiscal short-falls we did not create. Investing inthe PSC contract is investing in the

future of the city and the state.Every dollar invested in CUNY generates significantly increasedincome for New Yorkers – to saynothing of the immeasurable in-crease through education in thequality of people’s lives.

The PSC is seeking a contract thatwill consolidate and extend the re-building of CUNY begun with thelast agreement. Put another way, weare trying to create the conditions inwhich it is possible to do the workwe love. Consider these demands apersonal invitation to become part ofthe effort to win the conditions weneed. To press a serious agenda forchange in the toughest fiscal climatein a generation, we will need to de-velop a new concept of member par-ticipation. It won’t be enough to offersupport from the sidelines, or cer-tainly to sit back and wait for “theunion” to bring home a raise. What’scalled for is a real change of the cul-ture of the University so that we re-alize and exert our considerablepower. Imagine a campus where noone considered themselves exemptfrom union work – then you’ll have asense of the transformation we need.

– Barbara Bowen for the negotiating team

Contract SpecialTHE PROFESSIONAL STAFF CONGRESS / CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK MAY/JUNE 2003

RECOGNITION AND NON-DISCRIMINATION1. All employees who perform func-tions that are the same as or similarto those in the bargaining unit shallbe included in the bargaining unit, re-gardless of the funding source fortheir positions.

2. All computer titles within an aca-demic or instructional area of theUniversity shall be presumed to beincluded in the PSC bargaining unit.All computer titles within an admin-istrative area shall be presumed tobe included in the bargaining unit ifthe majority of the job responsibili-ties are instructional in nature orsupport the instructional activitiesof the University.

3. CUNY Health and Safety Officersand all other CUNY employees whoperform health and safety functions

shall be included in the PSC bargain-ing unit.

4. The exemption of Continuing Ed-ucation titles from certain articles ofthe Agreement, including but not limited to Articles 20 and 21, shall be discontinued.

5. Amend Article 8.1 (“Non-Discrim-ination”) to include “armed serviceveteran status, including service inthe Vietnam War and the Gulf War.”

6. A labor/management committeeshall be formed to develop a propos-al to increase the racial, gender andethnic diversity at all levels of thefaculty and staff, and to provide acomparison of salaries of bargainingunit members by race, gender andethnicity. The committee will be pro-vided with modest funding to sup-port necessary research by CUNYscholars in this area. The committee

will be charged with presenting aplan and a timeline for achieving fac-ulty/staff diversity comparable toCUNY’s student diversity.

7. The titles in the CLT series shallbe renamed to reflect the changedscope of these employees’ work:Technical Associate, Senior Techni-cal Associate, Chief Technical Asso-ciate.

8. Under the definition of Continu-ing Education programs, Article 1 inthe Continuing Education Agree-ment, the word “typically” shall bedeleted. Article 6 of the ContinuingEducation Agreement shall be delet-ed, and replaced by the following:“Employees in the Continuing Edu-cation Teacher title who teach non-credit-bearing remedial or ESL in-structional programs shall be placedat the appropriate salary step in theLecturer or Assistant Professor title.”

Consider thesedemands apersonalinvitation tojoin the effortto win theconditions we need.

A new bargaining agenda: 2003

PROFESSIONAL STAFF CONGRESS/CUNY

2003 DEMANDS FOR SUCCESSOR AGREEMENT

All illustrations Contract Special: Jud Guitteau

A2 CONTRACT DEMANDS Clarion | May/June 2003

PSC-CUNY RELATIONS9. Article 2 of the Agreement shallbe amended to provide for man-agement’s duty to negotiate withthe PSC and for enforcement ofthis duty under Article 20.

10. The amount of reassigned timeallocated to the Professional StaffCongress for enforcement of thecontract shall be increased to 250hours per semester.

SALARY11. Salaries must be comprehen-sively lifted – for all titles and allranks – so the University regainsits salary competitiveness with oth-er major universities regionallyand nationwide. Historic inequitiesof salary must also be addressed.All members of the bargaining unit,including bargaining unit membersemployed at the Educational Op-portunity Centers and in Continu-ing Education series titles, shall receive a substantial per annumacross-the-board salary increase.

12. Part-time instructional staffshall be paid on the basis of paritywith comparable full-time instruc-tional staff.

13. Amend Article 24: The five-year step and the seven-year stepshall be converted to one-yearsteps and one new step shall beadded to the top of each full-timesalary schedule.

14. Lecturers and EOC Lecturersshall be placed on the AssistantProfessor salary scale at the ap-propriate step, and subsequent to

the enactment of this provision the Lecturer Doctoral and EOCLecturer Doctoral schedule shallbe eliminated.

15. Higher Education Officers shallnot be expected or required towork in excess of 35 hours perweek. Overtime for Higher Educa-tion Officers shall be compensatedat the rate of time-and-a-half forany work in excess of 35 hours aweek.

16. All non-classroom instructionalstaff members shall receive differ-ential pay for all work performedon weekends and evenings.

17. Annual salary and salary stepsequal to that of Lecturers shall beestablished for continuing educa-tion teachers teaching in programssuch as CLIP.

18. The Settlement Agreement ofJune 25, 2002 on salaries in excessof base salary shall be amended toprovide for election by faculty andHigher Education Officers respec-tively of the pool of faculty andHigher Education Officers at eachcampus from which the ad hoccommittees are appointed; it shallalso be amended to provide foropen reporting of the recommen-dations of the ad hoc committees.

19. The period between salarysteps for part-time faculty shall bereduced from three years to oneyear, and the value of each stepshall be substantially increased.Service University-wide shall beincluded when computing move-ment in scale.

20. It shall be the responsibility ofthe University to inform part-timefaculty [, within one week of the be-ginning of the semester,] of therank and salary at which they arebeing paid at each campus onwhich they are employed. In theevent a salary adjustment is calledfor, such salary adjustment shallbe retroactive to the date of employment.

21. Salary parity for all Educa-tional Opportunity Centers with comparable CUNY titles shall bemaintained.

JOB SECURITY 22. There shall be no layoffs duringthe course of this agreement.

23. There shall be no use of Substi-tutes beyond the contractuallystated uses.

24. Higher Education Officers and College Laboratory Techni-cians shall be eligible for promo-tion according to the following procedures:

a) The Higher Education Officeseries shall be established as a promotional series, such that employees demonstratethrough preparation of a port-folio or meeting performancecriteria their eligibility for ahigher title. After five years ofservice in the Assistant to HEOtitle, employees shall be matu-rated automatically to the titleHigher Education Assistant.

b) The College LaboratoryTechnician series shall be re-es-

tablished as a promotional se-ries using standard instruction-al staff promotional proce-dures. The Bylaw provisionstating that the CLT title is anon-teaching title shall be ob-served. The criteria for promo-tion for Chief CLT shall beamended in order to make pos-sible promotion to Chief CLT atthe community colleges. Article22.2 shall be amended to ex-pand promotional opportuni-ties for CLTs.

25. Job security for Higher Educa-tion Officers and College Laborato-ry Technicians shall be providedthrough the following provisions:

a) HEOs shall receive one-yearnotice of retrenchment.

b) A Certificate of ContinuousAdministrative Service shall begranted under Article 13.3b toHEOs for University-wide ser-vice, cumulative in all HEO se-ries titles held by the employee.Time served in Substitute titlesshall be included for HEOswhen computing 13.3.b statusand for CLTs when computingtenure.

c) The schedule for reappoint-ment for employees in the HEOseries title shall be amended toprovide for one one-year reap-pointment and one two-yearreappointment after the initialappointment, as a pre-requisitefor 13.3b status.

d) Delete the first paragraph ofArticle 13.12.a and all of 13.12.b.

26. A seniority/hiring preferencesystem for part-time instructionalstaff, in both classroom and non-classroom titles, shall be in-troduced. A seniority/hiring pref-erence system for Continuing Edu-cation Teachers who are eligiblefor benefits shall be introduced.

27. A labor/management commit-tee shall be formed to develop aplan during the course of negotia-tions for movement of part-timefaculty into new full-time facultypositions.

28. There shall be no loss of eligi-bility for benefits for members ofthe bargaining unit who move froma part-time title to any other CUNYtitle, regardless of the source offunds for the position, or who inter-rupt service in a part-time title toaccept a Substitute position.

29. Part-time faculty at the Educa-tional Opportunity Centers shallreceive one-year appointments onthe same terms as were negotiatedfor other part-time faculty andshall be paid for professional or of-fice hours on the same basis asother part-time faculty at CUNY.

WORKLOAD30. Teaching loads throughout theUniversity shall be made compara-ble to those at other major publicuniversities. As a first step in thisprocess, the undergraduate con-tact teaching hour load shall be reduced by three hours per year at both community and senior colleges.

Clarion | May/June 2003 CONTRACT DEMANDS A3

31. The contact teaching hourworkload at New York City Col-lege of Technology shall be re-duced to achieve parity with allother senior colleges.

32. All Library faculty, regardless ofwhen hired, shall be placed on thefull-time teaching faculty calendar.

33. All faculty Counselors, regard-less of when hired, shallbe restored to the full-timeteaching faculty calendar.

34. All untenured Libraryand Counseling facultyshall be assigned one se-mester of reassigned timefor scholarly and/or cre-ative work during theirfirst three annual appointments.

35. The Workload SettlementAgreement Article 3.b, which al-lows colleges that had a practice ofcontact hour multiples for specifiedcourses during the 1981-82 acade-mic year to continue such prac-tices, shall be deleted.

36. The provision for a profession-al hour negotiated in the last col-lective bargaining agreement shallbe amended so that eligibility maybe reached by service University-wide.

37. Workload for courses employ-ing new media, known variously aseducational technology and dis-tance learning, shall be governedby the workload provisions of thisAgreement. The increased work-load – for all members of the bar-gaining unit – arising from instruc-tion in these media shall besupported by the University andfully compensated. Such supportand compensation shall include butnot be limited to: extra workloadcredit, smaller class size, andagreements on staffing levels forsupport and technical employees.Instructors shall retain control ofthe mode of instruction employedin their courses.

38. Academic departments shallhave the authority to set class andsection size limits. A report onclass size throughout CUNY, forevery class and section on everycampus, shall be provided to thePSC. A labor/management com-mittee shall be established to mon-itor compliance with class and sec-tion size limits specified byacademic departments.

39. Class size has an impact on theworkload of teaching faculty. As aresult, the University has an oblig-ation to compensate faculty if theirclasses exceed specified depart-mental limits on size. In the eventclass size exceeds departmentalsize limits, the instructor shall re-ceive one additional contact hourcredit toward the instructor’steaching workload for each fivestudents above the departmentallimit.

40. Article 25.3 shall be amended toprovide as an entitlement for all in-structional staff members of thepermanent instructional staff andall teachers and counselors at theHunter Campus Schools: fellow-ship leaves for a full year at fullsalary.

41. There shall be increased avail-ability of reassigned time for full-

time faculty, includingfor scholarly work, creative work, contri-butions to the universi-ty and the profession.The workload agree-ment provision givingdiscretion in allocationof reassigned time tocollege presidents shall

be amended.

42. The instructional staff at theHunter College Campus Schools(including those on unpaid leave)shall be eligible for assignment toshare a full-time position with an-other staff member and shall be en-titled to full health and welfarebenefits, seniority and pensioncredit, and pro-rata salary, includ-ing vacation pay and sick leave.

TIME AND LEAVE43. All non-teaching instructionalstaff personnel shall earn annualleave at the same rate as person-nel hired before September 1, 1987.The maximum accrual of annualleave days for non-teaching in-structional staff members shall beincreased.

44. Holiday pay at the rate of time-and-a-half shall be paid to non-teaching instructional staff whowork on paid holidays, and suchemployees shall earn one addition-al day of paid leave for each holi-day worked.

45. Article 14.8 shall be amended toprovide for sick leave for bothteaching and non-teaching ad-juncts. Teaching part-time instruc-tional staff shall earn sick days atthe rate of one day for every con-tact teaching hour per semester.Non-teaching part-time instruc-tional staff shall earn sick days atthe rate of one day for every 3hours per week of work during asemester. Part-time instructionalstaff, both teaching and non-teach-ing, shall be eligible to accrue up to80 sick days. Teaching and non-teaching adjuncts shall be providedwith short-term disability coveragethrough the NYS Insurance Fund.

46. A promotional scale and sab-batical provision shall be intro-duced for EOC instructional staff,using proposals developed by the labor/management committeeformed through the last collectivebargaining agreement.

HEALTH, WELFARE AND QUALITY OF LIFE47. There shall be a substantial in-crease in contributions to thePSC/CUNY Welfare Fund for allactive and retired members of thebargaining unit, including employ-ees at the Educational OpportunityCenters.

48. Part-time instructional staffmembers shall be included in theNew York City Health BenefitsProgram.

49. Graduate assistants shall re-ceive health insurance.

50. Under certain conditions, em-ployees shall have the opportuni-ty to bank sick days to meet spe-cial needs of others in thebargaining unit or to convert sickdays to support wellness and preventive health measures forthemselves.

51. Tuition shall be waived forCUNY graduate students who are

employed by the University andfor immediate family members anddomestic partners of members ofthe bargaining unit. The provisionfor tuition waivers for part-time in-structional staff shall be amendedso that certain current restrictionsare lifted and access to tuition re-mission for part-time instructionalstaff is increased. The provision fortuition waivers for full-time in-structional staff shall be amendedto include summer sessions.

52. The University shall establishchildcare services at each campusfor members of the bargaining unitand shall subsidize these serviceswith a graduated fee schedule.

Salary equityand improvedprofessionalconditions aremembers’priorities.

A4 CONTRACT DEMANDS Clarion | May/June 2003

53. Family Medical Leave shall notrun concurrently with sick leave;and the University shall establishfull-paid three-month leave for theintroduction of a new child into thehousehold.

54. The professional developmentof part-time faculty shall be sup-ported by the University.

55. The University shallrecognize the right of allmembers of the bargainingunit to have access to allCUNY college campuses.

56. Part-time members ofthe instructional staff shallbe entitled to adequate of-fice space and equipment (includ-ing, but not limited to a desk, chair,phone, filing cabinets, computerswith internet access and a Univer-sity email account), and shall haveaccess to and be listed in public di-rectories for voicemail and email.Employees in the Continuing Edu-cation series shall have libraryprivileges at the campus on whichthey work and shall be entitled toaccess to campus facilities on thesame basis as other members ofthe bargaining unit.

57. The University shall reimburseall eligible EOC retirees and theirspouses for the costs of MedicarePart B.

58. The requirement that retireesenrolled in the Optional Retire-ment Programs must retain 33 per-cent of the accumulation in TIAA-CREF shall be modified.

59. Amend Article 5 of the Contin-uing Education Agreement to es-tablish eligibility for the New YorkCity Health Benefits Program foremployees who teach at least 15hours per week for at least 30

weeks per year. The provisions forsick leave accrual and longevitypay negotiated in the last collectivebargaining agreement shall be ex-tended to employees who teach atleast 15 hours per week for at least30 weeks per year.

60. Instructional staff at the HunterCollege Campus Schools shall beeligible for unpaid leaves of ab-

sence for a period ofone year for advancedstudies, travel, com-munity service or oth-er purposes mutuallyagreed upon. Suchleave shall not be con-sidered a break in ser-vice for any purpose;

seniority and pension credit shallaccrue during such leave.

SAFETY AND HEALTH61. The University shall provideheating and ventilation that meetsor exceeds the standards recom-mended by the American Societyof Heating Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers (ASHRAE);the University shall also complywith the highest appropriate stan-dards of workplace sanitation, ac-cess to safe drinking water, clean-liness, temperature, light and noisecontrol.

62. In order to ensure that con-struction, renovation and repair donot interfere with the working andlearning environment, the Univer-sity shall inform employees in ad-vance of the nature and projectedduration of construction projects,and shall ensure that all construc-tion contracts (with DASNY and/orsub-contractors) include imple-mentation of appropriate stan-dards to isolate the constructionarea. Campus-based Environmen-

tal Health and Safety personnelshall have the right to stop con-struction temporarily if hazardsand noise violations interfere withworking conditions.

63. The University shall provide aworkplace that meets City andState requirements for fire safetyand emergency evacuation, includ-ing but not limited to room andarea occupancy limits.

64. Add to Article 39.1: “The coop-erative PSC-CUNY health andsafety mechanism shall meet with-in ten days of the filing of thehealth and safety grievance. In nomore than 10 days after the firstmeeting, the committee shall pro-vide a resolution of the grievance;in no more than 10 days after theresolution is reached, the Univer-sity shall implement the remedy. Ifeither of these time limits is notmet, the PSC may proceed with thegrievance.”

65. In recognition of the critical im-portance of counseling for healthand safety throughout the Univer-sity, the University shall providethe PSC with a report on the ratioof faculty Counselors to students atevery CUNY campus. A labor/man-agement committee shall beformed and shall issue a report onstaffing needs for faculty Coun-selors at CUNY.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTYAND EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY66. It shall be presumed that all in-tellectual property that is either acopyrightable or a patentable cre-ation and/or invention by a mem-ber of the bargaining unit shall beowned by the creator unless limit-

ed by provisions negotiated withand agreed to by the ProfessionalStaff Congress.

67. All terms within the context ofUniversity employment apportion-ing the share of proceeds from in-tellectual property to anyone otherthan the creator(s) shall be negoti-ated with and agreed to by thePSC.

68. All disputes arising from theapplication of the terms negotiatedby the parties regarding intellectu-al property and educational tech-nology shall be subject to the dispute resolution procedures ofArticle 20 of the Agreement.

REAPPOINTMENT, GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION69. The procedures on presidentialappeals shall be amended:

a) Add to Article 9.10 and to Ar-ticle 9.12: “Whenever an appealis submitted to the Presidentunder this Article, the Presi-dent must respond within tencalendar days of the receipt ofthe appeal.”

b) Add a new section to Article9 (after 9.10): “The employeeshall have the right to submit arebuttal to the President’s rea-sons within 30 calendar days ofthe employee’s receipt of saidreasons; the rebuttal shall be-come part of the employee’sfile.”

c) Part-time instructional staffshall have the right to receivereasons for a denial of reap-pointment or promotion.

d) HEOs shall be entitled toPresidential reasons in thecase of a denial of reappoint-ment, beginning with the firstreappointment.

70. The grievance procedure shallbe amended:

a) Add to Article 20.4: “Any

grievance not responded to in accordance with time limitsspecified herein shall bedeemed sustained by the University.”

b) Delete the bar to grievancerights under 18.2(d) and 18.3(d).

c) Expand time limits for initi-ating grievances at Step Oneand Step Two of the grievanceprocedure to one hundredeighty (180) calendar days.

d) Add to Article 20.5(c)(2):“Payment for multiple positionteaching shall not be deductedfrom back-pay awards.” AmendArticle 20.5(c)(2) to includeCCAS.

71. Amend Article 21 on Discipli-nary Actions:

a) Employees shall be informedin writing of their right to unionrepresentation prior to anymeeting that may lead to theinitiation of disciplinary action.

b) Delete Article 21.12 (on pro-cedures in the case of convic-tion of a felony) to conform withState law.

c) Amend Article 21.8 (b)(4) toremove the restriction on thearbitrator’s considering, in thecontext of a disciplinary pro-ceeding, alleged violations ofthe collective bargaining agree-ment and CUNY Bylaws orwritten policies.

d) The Sexual Harassment Pro-cedure shall be modified to en-sure due process and protec-tions consistent with Articles20 and 21 and to ensure strictconfidentiality.

The Professional Staff Congress re-serves the right to amend or sup-plement these demands during col-lective bargaining.

Approved unanimously by thePSC Delegate Assembly, May 1,2003.

Publicemployeesshould not payfor fiscalshortfalls wedid not create.

PSC delegates made their presencefelt among the thousands of educa-tors attending the annual meetingof New York State United Teachers(NYSUT) on April 3 through 5 inWashington, D.C.

The meeting of NYSUT’s Repre-sentative Assembly (RA), thegroup’s governing body, adopted 13out of 15 resolutions proposed by thePSC. Resolutions passed at the RAset the political agenda of NYSUT,one of the largest unions in the state.

A PSC proposal on unemploy-ment insurance for part-time facul-ty won strong backing from dele-gates to the RA (see p. 9). In thecrowded room where the Higher Ed-ucation Committee met, “there wasgreat enthusiasm for the PSC reso-lutions on part-time academic la-bor,” said Marcia Newfield, PSC vicepresident for part-time personnel. “Iwas surprised that we got so muchsupport.” Delegates also voted tocreate a NYSUT Committee on Part-Time Labor, to press for fair treat-ment and pay equity for adjuncts.

The RA passed a PSC proposal onpension equity, supporting legisla-tive action to provide some form ofcost-of-living allowance (COLA) forthose in TIAA-CREF and otherplans in the Optional RetirementSystem. In addition, they voted tosupport legislation to include CUNYemployees in the Transit-Chekprogram (see p. 12).

Delegates backed a PSC resolu-tion that commits NYSUT to lobbyfor funding to address the shortages

of both full-time College Lab Tech-nicians (CLTs) and technical equip-ment at CUNY. Also approved wasa call for legislation on indoor airquality, which would require 20 cu-bic feet per minute per person offresh air in all school and collegeclassrooms, laboratories and workareas.

The PSC’s delegates supported aresolution on the protection of intel-lectual and academic freedom,which calls for careful scrutiny ofthe provisions of the USA-PATRIOTAct and Homeland Security Act.The resolution, submitted by the

United University Professions ofSUNY, also calls for NYSUT to pro-mote legislation that will protect the“free and open pursuit of informa-tion and knowledge in a teachingand learning environment.”

REPARATIONS DEBATEA PSC resolution supporting Rep.

John Conyers’s bill (HR 40) to estab-lish a commission to study repara-tions for the enslavement of AfricanAmericans sparked a lively debate.Opponents contended that the issuewould be divisive, something theysaid NYSUT could not afford during

the current budget crisis. “My firstfeeling was I was doubtful it was go-ing to get out of committee,” saidPSC Executive Council memberSamuel Farrell, one of the authors ofthe proposal.

But delegates from the UFT andother locals spoke in favor of theidea, and it ultimately passed by awide margin. Supporters arguedthat the history of slavery still has aprofound impact on America today,and that this legacy must be betterunderstood.

“I was very glad to see that a mix-ture of people came to defend theresolution,” said Farrell. He notedthat the measure does not take a po-sition for or against reparations,which probably helped it to pass. Astudy “will not take away the hurtand damage of slavery,” Farrell said,“but it makes the story be told.”

The PSC also sought to pass a res-olution on another charged issue –the war with Iraq. “The resolutioncalled for NYSUT to discuss the waras part of understanding what we’refacing in terms of budget cuts,” saidPSC Executive Council member Nan-cy Romer, “and also to consider its ef-fect in terms of limits on civil liber-ties.” At a PSC-sponsored forum,scores of delegates signed up to forman anti-war group within NYSUT.

Because the US attack on Iraqhad begun just two weeks beforethe RA met, it was not possible tosubmit this resolution through thenormal process. President BarbaraBowen therefore had to introduce

the resolution from the floor of theRA as a “special order of business.”With no discussion, a vote onwhether to consider the resolutionwas called, and it lost by a widemargin.

MIXED SCORE ON TESTINGThe PSC also submitted two reso-

lutions on testing, one of which wasadopted.

The first proposal urged that NYSUT oppose the “dominance” ofstandardized testing in determininga student’s future in education.“Many teachers feel that they’re sti-fled and can’t be creative anymore,”said Susan DiRaimo, co-chair of thePSC’s Open Access Committee.“Teachers want to speak up againstthis and how it’s shaping the curriculum.”

After a vigorous discussion, thatresolution was defeated in commit-tee. Opponents objected to the term“dominance” and argued that NYSUT has already said that testsshouldn’t be the one determiningfactor in areas like college admis-sions. But the proposal touched achord; several delegates from otherlocals spoke out to support it on thefloor of the RA, even though it wasnot up for a vote.

The second, more limited resolu-tion called for NYSUT to study stan-dardized tests and monitor the mis-use of high-stakes tests. This passedby a wide margin in committee andon the floor of the RA.

Other PSC resolutions approvedby the RA called for continued mon-itoring of the effects of ending reme-diation at CUNY’s senior colleges;an independent nominating panelfor CUNY and SUNY trustee ap-pointments; and progressive taxa-tion measures for NY State. –TG

By TOMIO GERON

The New Caucus swept the Aprilelection for leadership of the Pro-fessional Staff Congress. It was un-opposed by any other slate, in thefirst union-wide voting since theNew Caucus (NC) won a close con-test in 2000.

The PSC’s four executive officers– President Barbara Bowen, FirstVice President Steve London, Secretary Cecelia McCall and Trea-surer John Hyland – were each re-elected with about 87% of the totalvote. The election was conductedby mail, with ballots counted onApril 24 by the American Arbitra-tion Association.

Recent constitutional changes ex-panded the PSC Executive Council(EC) by four seats, to create moreequitable representation for differ-ent types of workers in the union.For the first time, elections wereheld for three new Officers for Part-time Personnel and an additionalCross-Campus Officer.

“In the next three years we willface many new challenges, both inthe political arena and at the bar-gaining table,” said McCall. “Thisexpanded leadership will meanbroader representation for newlyorganized PSC members. It will helpbuild an even stronger union that isnow recognized as a voice for thepublic sector.”

NON-SLATE CANDIDATELou Alpert, a professor of mathe-

matics at Bronx Community Col-lege, ran as an individual for Uni-versity-wide Officer but was notelected, receiving about 18% of thevote. “I thought it was important foran independent candidate to be rep-resented in this election,” Alpertsaid. “A democratic union needs tohave a line-by-line choice, not just aslate.” Alpert had served as a PSCCommunity College Officer since

2000, when he was elected on theNew Caucus ticket.

The Unity Caucus, which held theleadership of the PSC until 2000, hasstopped functioning, according toCross-Campus Officer Steve Trim-boli. A College Lab Techni-cian, Trimboli was twiceelected on the Unity Cau-cus slate but this year ranas a New Caucus candi-date. “I was happy toswitch because the leader-ship that was here did a lotof wonderful things,” he said. Trim-boli noted that some chapter leaderswho had been part of the Unity Cau-cus won reelection to local posts in2001 and 2002.

Ballots were returned by 27% ofmembers in the cross-campus unitsand senior college chapters, by 34%in the community college chaptersand by 43% of retiree members.

Complete results are available onthe PSC Web site, at www.psc-cuny.org.

The EC now has eight new mem-bers, all NC candidates, and theyeach aim to add their perspective to

the EC. “My main goal would be

to push on diversity in theUniversity,” said RobertCarter, a newly electedUniversity-wide Officer,who worked on affirma-tive action issues at CUNY

before he became an assistant pro-fessor of Sociology at Hunter Col-lege. Carter also hopes to “build theunion membership and find innova-tive ways to make members moreactive.”

Vincent Tirelli, a new Officer forPart-time Personnel and an adjunctlecturer at Brooklyn College, toldClarion, “It’s very historic that we

have these three new part-time fac-ulty officer positions. I’m excited tobe a part of that.”

Vera Weekes, a new Cross-Cam-pus Officer and a Higher EducationOfficer (HEO) at Medgar Evers Col-lege, hopes to energize HEO andCLT involvement in the union. “Ourhope is we can empower our mem-bers to take control of whatever sit-uation they’re in,” she said.

NEW FACESOther new faces on the EC are

University-wide Officer JonathanBuchsbaum, Officers for Part-timePersonnel Susan DiRaimo and Di-ane Menna, Community College Of-ficers Andrew McInerney andShirley Rausher and Cross-CampusOfficer Arthurine DeSola.

Officers reelected to the EC in-clude Stanley Aronowitz, Bob Cer-mele, Janice Cline, Iris DeLutro,Mike Fabricant, Samuel Farrell,Anne Friedman, Susan O’Malley,Marcia Newfield, Nancy Romer andSheldon Weinbaum.

Clarion | May/June 2003 NEWS 7

First vote for new Executive Council posts

New Caucus reelected to lead PSC

NYSUT annual policy meetingMost PSC resolutions pass

The PSCExecutiveCouncil haseight newmembers.

PSC delegates at the NYSUT Higher Education Committee meeting: (back, L to R)Bob Cermele, Janice Cline, (front L to R) Marcia Newfield and Steve London.

Tom

io G

eron

By STEVE LONDONPSC First Vice President and Welfare Fund Executive Officer

Recent changes in dental and otherbenefits stem from a simple fact: theWelfare Fund has run an operatingdeficit for 11 out of the last 14 yearsand the deficits have been gettingworse. Consequently, Fund re-serves are running out at an alarm-ing rate and unless benefit changeis instituted, the Fund will go broke.

Even though we won millions ofdollars more for the Welfare Fund inthe last contract, prescription drugand other benefit costs have sky-rocketed. In this environment, pour-ing more money into the Fund with-out changing our benefit structurewill not solve the Fund’s financialproblems.

Members wanted us to maintainthe same prescription drug benefitfor both retirees and active mem-bers. Because this is expensive, wehad to cut $1.5 million out of the $4million we spent on dental benefitslast year. There is no way to do thiswithout causing hardship for some.

Cutting benefits is never easy. Ican assure you that the Trustees ag-onize over these decisions and noth-ing was done without much discus-

sion and concern for the impact onmembers. Below are answers tosome of the most common questionsabout changes in the dental plan.

Q How does the new planwork?

A Guardian provides the Fund’smembership with access to its

panel of dentists, who have agreedto provide their services at a dis-count. This is called a PreferredProvider Organization (PPO).

Q How are Guardian dentists’prices established?

A Guardian negotiates with eachdentist to set prices for each

procedure. The discounts and re-sulting prices of Guardian dentistsdo vary. They vary most by loca-tion; within a given zip code the

range in price is limited. It is possi-ble to shop around by askingGuardian dentists what they chargefor various procedures.

Q What if my dentist doesn’tparticipate in Guardian?

A First, check the Guardian Website to see if your dentist is a

member (www. guardianmarketing.com/psccuny). If not, talk to yourdentist about participating. You cansponsor him/her for Guardian mem-bership, using forms available onthe Guardian Web site.

Q I took a look at the scheduleof payments and it seems like

we basically lost our dental bene-fit, didn’t we?

A No. Many members misunder-stand the dental coverage be-

cause they look only at the amountthe Fund reimburses for each pro-cedure. If you use a Guardian den-tist, you will get a substantial dis-count BEFORE the Fund’s subsidyis applied.

Q Is there a deductible underthe new dental plan?

A No, there is no deductible.

Q Why did the Trustees chooseGuardian?

A We considered three factors:access, cost and quality. Today,

dentists charge different prices forthe same procedure. For example; ifyou walk in off the street and arenot part of any dental plan, you maybe charged $1,000 for a crown. Thisis the “usual and customary fee.”

If you are a member of a PPO, thedentist will charge you less for thevery same procedure. The DeltaDental PPO tends to be the most ex-pensive (a crown may cost a Deltamember $900), while Guardian costsless (a crown may cost $800).

Some PPOs offer even lowerprices. However, more dentists be-long to PPOs that pay them morefor each procedure. The Trusteeshad to balance access (the numberof dentists in a PPO’s panel) withmembers’ out-of-pocket costs.Guardian provided the best mix of

these two factors: access and out-of-pocket cost.

Also important is that Guardianhas a good national reputation forthe quality of dentists in its panel.

The third largest national PPO,Guardian has over 6,000 participat-ing dentists in the metropolitanarea and 64,000 nationwide. Unlikethe SIDS panel, which totaled only1,300 nationally and less than 1,000locally, Guardian will provide ourmembers with broad access to qual-ity dentists at a substantial dis-count.

Q Why did the Trustees put solittle subsidy on expensive

procedures?

A First, Guardianadvised us to

put most of our lim-ited resources intoprevention, becausethat will have thebest long-term pay-off. Second, givenother choices wehave made, we don’thave enough re-sources to provide asubstantial benefitfor defraying thecost of expensiveprocedures for all ofour members. Pre-ventive services

will cost all members very little, andfor the 80% of Fund members whoused non-participating dentists forexpensive procedures in the oldplan, out-of-pocket costs should notbe substantially higher.

Q I am one of those 20% whoused a SIDS dentist for

expensive procedures. My den-tal costs will skyrocket. Whydidn’t the Trustees consider my circumstance?

A Over the years, our dental ben-efit structure developed in an

uneven way. It is true that 20% ofour members were using a dispro-portionate amount of the dentalbenefit and getting a good deal. Atthe same time, many members com-plained bitterly about the old dentalplan and the limited number of par-ticipating dentists. In fact, during

our membership meetings last fall,many members commented thatour dental plan was worthless andshould be ended altogether.

The Trustees were in a difficultposition, because we had to cut overa third of the dental benefit’s fund-ing and still try to fashion a dentalplan that meets some of our mem-bers’ needs. By expanding the pan-el of participating dentists, theTrustees, for the first time in years,are providing a dental benefit thatreasonably allows all members theopportunity to participate in anequal quality benefit. The discountplan limits the expense and pro-vides some relief at the high end.

Q Will I now have to use aGuardian dentist to get a ben-

efit from this plan?

A No. You can still go out-of-net-work, but the benefit you re-

ceive will depend on the procedure.For preventive care, the benefit ex-ceeds the out-of-network subsidyunder the old dental plan. For moreexpensive procedures, the out-of-network benefit is minimal.

Q Aren’t retirees being disadvan-taged by this plan since they

have more expensive proceduresthan younger, active members?

A Benefits should be seen as awhole. Unlike other teacher’s

unions (e.g., the UFT and UUP), thePSC/CUNY Welfare Fund providesthe same benefit structure for bothretirees and actives. The prescrip-tion drug benefit, the most expen-sive benefit provided by the Fund,goes disproportionately to the re-tirees. Other benefits, such asCIGNA major medical coverage, al-so go disproportionately to oldermembers.

Q How is the Welfare Fundfunded? Does the money

come from dues?

A The Welfare Fund derives itsrevenue almost exclusively

from CUNY in amounts negotiatedwith the PSC and between the Mu-nicipal Labor Committee and theCity of New York. In FY 2002, em-ployer contributions totaled over$21 million. The last contract in-creased annual employer contribu-tions by $4.3 million and added one-time contributions of an equalamount. The PSC also successfullynegotiated with CUNY to retire a$2.8 million Fund liability.

The PSC and the Welfare Fundare separate legal entities and de-rive their operating revenues fromdifferent sources. No PSC duesmoney is paid to the Welfare Fund.

8 BENEFITS/CALENDAR Clarion | May/June 2003

How to get the most out of the new plan

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4 / 6 pm: Forum on “Public Workers and the Rightto Strike.” Josh Freeman, Jim Pope,Roger Toussaint and BarbaraBowen. At NYC Central LaborCouncil (CLC), 31 W. 15th Street.Sponsored by the CLC and Progres-sive Trade Unionists.

TUESDAY, JUNE 10 / 9 – 3 pm: Pre-re-tirement conference. Please notethe new date. At the Graduate Cen-ter, 365 5th Ave. Call 212-354-1252.

THURSDAY, JUNE 12 / 6 pm: PSCWomen’s Committee meeting. Atthe PSC office, 25 W. 43rd St.

JULY 6-11: New Media ClassroomSummer Institute, “Learning toLook: Visual Resources & Multicul-tural Teaching.” Sponsored by theCCNY CWE, and others. Call NancyWeyandt, (212) 966-4248, x218.

CALENDAR

YOUR BENEFITS

Q&A on dental plan changesNYSUT and UAW agree on organizingThe New York State United Teach-ers (NYSUT), the PSC’s state affili-ate, and the United Auto Workers(UAW) have reached agreementon organizing academic employeeson New York college campuses.NYSUT and the UAW will now co-ordinate organizing efforts acrossthe state in hopes of strengtheningboth unions’ campaigns. “Now in-stead of competing, we’ll be coop-erating,” said NYSUT PresidentTom Hobart. “It’s a win-win foreveryone.” Last year the UAW andNYSUT/ AFT both sought to repre-sent adjuncts at New York Univer-sity, with UAW eventually win-ning the election. The UAW andNYSUT will now support each oth-er’s organizing campaigns, includ-ing at the New School, where theUAW is organizing both full- andpart-time faculty, and at the CUNYResearch Foundation, where thePSC has a growing campaign (seepage 3).

Mental health breakGetting active in social movementsis not just good for the world, it’sgood for your health. According toresearchers at the University ofSussex in Britain, people who takepart in marches, picketing and direct action can gain a sense ofempowerment and confidence that contributes to psychologicalhealth. Such emotions were moststrongly associated with actionsthat developed a sense of collec-tive identity, unity and mutualsupport. The in-depth study of 40activists found that participationin protest crowds and social move-ments can result in deep feelingsof happiness – and even euphoria.

LABORIN BRIEF

Jud

Gui

ttea

u

By MARCIA NEWFIELDPSC Vice President for Part-Time Personnel

Summer is here and many adjunctsand other part-time instructors arewithout work. No work means nopay – so can an adjunct collect un-employment compensation?

If you received a letter of non-reappointment, indicating that youwill not teach a class in the fall, youshould be able to get unemploymentinsurance (UI) benefits without aproblem. You can file a claim overthe phone, by calling the TelephoneClaim Center at 888-209-8124. Bene-fits would start two weeks after yourclaim is filed (check www.labor.state.ny.us for de-tails). If your claim is de-nied, you have 30 days toask for a hearing. Mean-while, continue to call inweekly and claim your UI benefits,so that if and when you win the hear-ing, your benefits will be retroactive.

REAPPOINTMENTIf, on the other hand, you were

sent a letter of reappointment, thesituation is less clear. CUNY main-tains that this letter constitutes“reasonable assurance” of a job inthe fall – though the letter acknowl-edges that that job’s existence is“subject to sufficiency of enrollment,financial availability and curriculumneed.” When a new term begins,many adjuncts are told – with little

or no advance notice – that theirclasses have been cancelled or thatthey will be replaced by a full-timeror a different part-time instructor.

For adjuncts, the issue of “rea-sonable assurance” is the questionupon which the decision to grant ordeny UI benefits will turn. If you got

a letter of reappointment and file a UI claim, your claim will often beinitially denied by the NYS Depart-ment of Labor. Jon Bloom, executivedirector of the Workers Defense

League (a nonprofitthat advocates for UI claimants), advisespeople to then requesta hearing. This mustbe done within 30

days of the date of the notice of de-nial. At the hearing, an administra-tive law judge (ALJ) will considerwhether your letter of reappoint-ment constitutes “reasonable assur-ance” of a job.

Various ALJs have made differentdeterminations. If your claim is de-nied by the ALJ, you have a right toappeal that judgment within 20 days;if your claim is upheld, CUNY mayappeal. The Appeal Board will eithersustain the ALJ’s decision or not.Even if your UI claim is ultimatelydenied, filing for a hearing may en-able you to win retroactive benefits

if you end up without aclass for the next se-mester.

If you are grantedUI benefits but thisdecision is later re-versed, will you haveto pay the moneyback? According to a1998 modification ofthe UI law, the onlyreason the Depart-ment of Labor can aska claimant to returnmonies is if he or shemade factually falsestatements or tookbenefits in bad faith(e.g., the claimant wasworking at anotherjob but did not reportit).

The Workers De-fense League canhelp you free ofcharge, withadvice, writ-ten materialsand sometimes represen-tation; they can be reached at 212-627-1931.

TREATED DIFFERENTLYWhy are adjuncts treated differently

from other workers who may experi-ence seasonal fluctuations in employ-ment? Current New York State lawsays that part-time employees of edu-cational institutions cannot collect UI

benefitsb e t w e e n

academicyears or terms

“if they have acontract or reason-

able assurance ofemployment in the period immediatelyfollowing.”

The PSC has been working tochange the law so that part-time in-structors will be treated like otherseasonal workers, without having towin disputes over what constitutes“reasonable assurance.” A union-backed bill is sponsored in the As-

sembly by SusanJohn, chair of the As-sembly Labor Com-mittee (A8190), and in the State Senateby Martin Golden(S5047). NYSUT, thePSC’s state affiliate,voted to support suchlegislative action at its2003 RepresentativeAssembly (see p. 7).

LOBBYINGAdjuncts and other

PSC members havetraveled to Albany tolobby for this change.Through the PSCWeb site, you cansend a letter urgingyour representativesin Albany to support

the bill (go to www.psc-cuny.org andclick on “ACT NOW”). If you wouldlike to help organize on this issue,contact Marcia Newfield at the PSCoffice (212-354-1252).

Meanwhile...to file or not to file?That is the question. Whether ’tisnobler in the mind to suffer theslings and arrows of no income, or toface the cruelty of CUNY manage-ment sending their lawyers to pre-vent the Department of Labor’sawarding of unemployment insur-ance to part-timers who are withoutwork...You’ll have to decide foryourself.

Clarion | May/June 2003 BENEFITS/HEALTH 9

By LAWRENCE J. KAPLANPSC Retiree Chapter Chair, 1991-2000

During the past decade, the steadyrise in the cost of prescription drugshas been no secret. While 98% of older Americans depend onMedicare, the program does not in-clude a provision essential to seniors – prescription drug cover-age. The price for these drugs hasbeen increasing at the rate of 17% to 19% a year, and will soon ex-ceed payments to doctors.

Older Americans spend moreout-of-pocket for prescription drugsthan the rest of the population.They have more acute and chronicillnesses, use more prescriptiondrugs for treatment and are lesslikely to have insurance to coverthe cost. People 65 and over makeup 13% of the population – but pur-chase 34% of all outpatient pre-scription drugs and account for 42cents of every dollar spent on pre-scription medication.

These figures add up to a crisis,with many seniors forced to choosebetween paying for food or medi-

cine. The clamor for government ac-tion has pushed even free-marketdevotees like President Bush to pro-pose some sort of federal program.But the Bush plan would do little tohelp older Americans and, in impor-tant ways, would hurt them.

EXCLUDES MILLIONSThe first version of Bush’s pro-

posal, put forward in January 2001,would exclude millions of moderate-income Americans who earn justabove its income limit. It would ruleout 25 million people, or about two-thirds of Medicare beneficiaries.The Bush plan also includes a $6,000deductible, restricting eligibility toan even smaller group. Averageprescription drug expenditures forthe top 10% of US purchasers are$4,800, much less than this proposeddeductible.

Bush’s proposals would not curbthe exorbitant prices of prescrip-tion drugs, or offer universal, af-fordable coverage. A simpler, more

effective approach would be to ex-pand Medicare benefits to includeprescription drugs, just as doctorvisits and hospital stays are cov-ered now.

The Alliance for Retired Ameri-cans has called for a prescriptiondrug benefit under Medicare thatwould be voluntary, afford-able and would hold downprescription drug costs.Specifically, such a programwould include a monthly in-dexed premium of $25, a $100annual deductible, a 20% co-insurance payment and a$2,000 cap on out-of-pocketcosts. H.R. 1199, a bill sup-ported by the AFL-CIO, em-bodies this alternative, andthe PSC has signed on with acoalition in support of thebill. The AFL-CIO has also urgedCongressional action to reduce drugprices, expand the availability ofgeneric drugs, and allow states toreduce drug costs by using the pow-

er of bulk purchasing. On March 3, 2003, the administra-

tion proposed another version of itsoriginal plan. People in the tradi-tional Medicare program would re-ceive two kinds of assistance: a dis-count card that could be used atpharmacies and so-called “cata-strophic coverage” as protectionagainst very high drug expenses,perhaps $4,500 to $6,000 a year.

As in the earlier ver-sion, those who want pre-scription drug coveragewould be required toleave Medicare and en-roll in a private HMO orother private insuranceplan. These groups wouldset the premiums and al-so determine prescriptioncosts. Subscribers couldbe dropped, as has hap-pened repeatedly to mil-lions of Medicare HMO

subscribers around the country, ifthe insurance company feels it is notmaking enough money.

Those left in the original Medi-care program would be the oldest,

the sickest and the least able to pay.As Medicare enrollment wouldshrink, premiums would have to beincreased, coverage would have becut, or both. Newt Gingrich oncecalled this strategy a stealthy wayto cause Medicare to “wither on the vine.” Those who support this concept think that creatingMedicare in 1965 was a bad idea inthe first place, and their declaredgoal of “modernizing” or “privatiz-ing” Medicare would mean an endto the program.

MEDICARE IS KEYInstead of the Bush plan, Ameri-

cans should remind officials thatwhat retirees need is an affordableprescription drug program underMedicare. Contact President Bush at 202-456-1414, or at 1600 Pennsyl-vania Ave., NW, Washington, DC20500. Members of Congress can bereached at 202-224-3121, or US Sen-ate, Washington, DC 20510 andHouse of Representatives, Wash-ington, DC 20515.

For the longer term, the U.S.should adopt a single-payer, univer-sal health care program that wouldeliminate unconscionable drugprices and the outrageous profits ofthe pharmaceutical industry.

Let’s make our voices heard!

To file or not to file?

Adjuncts and unemployment insurance

Bush plan is no solution

Needed: aplan underMedicarethat isvoluntary,affordableand holdsdown drugprices.

Jud

Gui

ttea

u

A prescription drug program for seniors?

YOUR BENEFITS

Were you sent a letter ofreappointment?

10 ESSAY Clarion | May/June 2003

By STANLEY ARONOWITZGraduate Center

My mother fell in her apart-ment, for the second time, onNew Year’s Day. When shefailed to answer her tele-phone, I called a neighbor –

who found her on the floor. We ordered an ambulance, which took her

to NYU Medical Center. The medics deter-mined from her dehydrated condition thatshe had been there for at least 18 hours andprobably fell while attempting to reach thebathroom in the middle of the night.

A week later my mother was transferredto the Rusk Institute, where she spent twoweeks resisting rehabilitation therapy. I visit-ed her almost every day and spent much ofthe time trying to persuade her to cooperatewith the therapy, warning (sometimes not sogently) that the price of refusal was long-term, perhaps terminal, dependency. Hergreatest fear was that she might have to go toa nursing home so she pretended to cooper-ate, but when she left the hospital it was clearthat she could no longer take care of herself.

About 12% of the US population is over 65,and the number over 75 is growing dramati-cally. This trend has exposed a huge hole inour social system: in many cases, includingmy own, people old enough to collect SocialSecurity are grappling with the problem ofhow to care for their parents. We discoverthat, except for help offered by some con-cerned neighbors, we are obliged to managethe situation alone.

ASSISTED LIVING?At age 89 it is not unusual to need help

with the tasks of daily life. But for my moth-er, who had lived independently for thirty-five years after my father’s death, it repre-sented a real setback. My partner Ellen Willisand I suggested “assisted living” arrange-ments that combine meals and medical carewith a private apartment – but my motherhas reservations about leaving her home forwhat she imagines as a black hole. Besides,publicly supported facilities cost at least$2,500 a month and private facilities chargemuch more. Given her circumstances, shewould be insolvent in about four years.

While no bones were broken, it was appar-ent to me that her physical condition had de-teriorated between her first fall in the sum-mer of 1997, her second at the start of 2003,and now. What I didn’t know until I enteredher apartment in Penn South, a union-spon-sored cooperative housing community inChelsea, was that she had not cleaned it formonths. For about a year she’d suggested alocal diner when we met for lunch; she nolonger invited me to pick her up at home.While she was able to walk, haltingly, clean-ing was beyond her capacity – or will.

After consulting with her neighbor and

her physicians, my partner Ellen and I deter-mined that she needed 24-hour care. SinceMedicare would pay only for a home healthcare worker for three days a week, we hireda full-time caregiver. We hoped my motherwould accept therapy at home, a service towhich she was entitled under Medicare(though only for 13 weeks). In time, wethought she might resume an independentexistence. As it turned out, in denial, she“fired” the home therapist twice.

FIERCELY INDEPENDENTMy mother worked outside the home from

her 14th year (when, after her own mother’sdeath, she dropped out of high school), evenafter marriage and the birth of her only child,until her retirement in 1980 at the age of 67.She stopped work during my first year, andintermittently thereafter, but otherwiseworked for the better part of 53 years. Shewas of a generation of fiercely independentwomen who, out of choice as well as necessi-ty, insisted on earning their own living anddid not want to be dependent on a man. Momwas always a loyal union member. Afteryears working in department stores, she be-came an office worker in shops organized byDistrict 65/UAW. My mother retired with asmall pension which, together with Social Se-curity, was enough to live on. In retirementshe swiftly set about to realize her abidingdream: to get a GED and enroll in college. Herfirst classes were at BMCC, but when I andothers at CUNY organized the CCNY Centerfor Worker Education, she transferred, most-ly because she wanted a BA and the programwas designed for “older students.” Sheearned her BA in 1987 at the age of 74.

But for the past fifteen years she has haddifficulty sustaining vigorous intellectualand physical activity. A painter and violinist,she decided her apartment was too small toaccommodate the easel, canvasses and paintsupplies and she had simply lost interest inplaying music, although she remains a pas-sionate listener. She disdains the senior citi-zens programs at Penn South as too “basic,”but the evening class schedule of mostCUNY master’s programs discouraged herfrom enrolling. During the last decade thedesire to do anything strenuous graduallydisappeared, and she spent her days quietlyat home. She said she was lonely, except forthe company of her birds and occasional vis-its from me and her grandchildren. She had aroommate for a time but has lived alonesince the mid-1980s.

Since my mother came home from the hos-pital, together with her full-time caregiver Ihave become her parent. Ellen and I pay herbills, deal with her medical appointments andpay her caregiver out of her savings account.Once I saw her about every two weeks; now I

visit her twice or three times a week. Now my daily life is suffused by my re-

sponsibilities to my mother. Ellen’s 89-year-old mother still lives independently, but thatcould change soon. So the prospect of spend-ing our sabbatical or summer leaves out ofstate, let alone out of the country, is fore-closed. Both of us have acquired a full-timeobsession and a demanding part-time job.

We are impeded in the performance of our“parental” duties by endless bureaucratichassles. For example, there is no easy way towithdraw funds from Mom’s bank accountwithout enduring an interrogation duringeach transaction. When we attempt to nego-tiate with creditors on her behalf, their cus-tomer service people insist that Mom calland give us permission to represent her.Sometimes we wait for weeks for a response.And I order, obtain and deliver her prescrip-tion drugs.

DRUG PLANMy mother barely qualified for New York

State’s prescription drug program, with anannual income just slightly below the $20,000maximum. Seniors who earn more than themaximum have no prescription drug planunless their union or employer provides one– and Mom’s union discontinued its pre-scription drug benefit for retirees years ago.

My mother’s infirm condition has mademe painfully aware that our society has allbut forgotten people over 75. Like almostevery entitlement except the Social Securitypension program, government policy re-stricts eligibility according to income criteriathat require poverty in order to receive bene-fits; an elderly person must empty her bankaccount three years in advance in order toqualify for Medicaid. The Medicaid andMedicare programs will not support her withadequate services if she chooses to live in

her own home, except for a few months afterleaving the hospital. Most older people withoptions refuse nursing homes because, withfew exceptions, they are holding pens ratherthan places that afford the opportunity tolive a rich life.

As a result of the failure of government torecognize the collective and universal natureof the problems associated with aging, manyAmericans are forced to accept privatizationof caregiving. My mother is spending downher savings on caregiving because the sys-tem simply will not sanction full-time or evenadequate permanent part-time home care.

Where are the unions in this crisis? Whilethey still favor universal health insuranceand defend the pension system, their oldermembers are often abandoned.

At a time when many unions are strug-gling to maintain hard-won prescriptiondrug and other health benefits, it may betime to take a hard look at adding enrichedcaregiver benefits to our Medicare system.While any Congressional battle over socialwelfare is bound to remain uphill for the nextperiod, unions might band together, as theyonce did, to provide members with low-costcooperative housing, to introduce this ser-vice at the state level and in union contracts.And why not consider union-sponsored as-sisted-living co-ops? If unions, rather thanprivate companies, were the providers, olderpeople like my mother might feel betterabout this alternative.

Today millions of people over age 65 haveto choose between paying the rent, eating orbuying prescription drugs. And let’s face it:without their children to supply countlesshours of free labor, the system would beeven more dysfunctional. We raise our chil-dren and it’s hard work, but through themwe can envision a brighter future. We carefor our parents because we love them – andthe alternatives are worse for them and,eventually, for us. Almost every day I think,“There but for pure luck go I.”

On becoming my parent’s parent

Caring formy mother

Our society has forgotten people over 75.

Jud

Gui

ttea

u

By BARBARA BOWENPSC President

Where in the public conversa-tion about the State Legis-lature’s historic budgetrestorations is there men-tion of the massive hole this

budget punches in CUNY’s public funding?From reading what has appeared in thepress, with the exception of one Newsday op-ed by a CUNY student, you might believethat the entire cut to CUNY had been re-stored. Not so – unless you think that forcingstudents to make up for a $121 million cut isa restoration.

What happened to the operating budgetfor CUNY’s senior colleges is this: althoughsome important restorations were made,state support drops by a staggering 12.5% ina single year, and tuition rises by at least30% to make up the difference. The trick tomaintaining a basically flat budget forCUNY’s senior colleges – while gouging thestate contribution – was to load the cost ontostudents. One way of thinking about the pol-itics of the decision is that while Albanyrightly refused to tolerate the increase in local property taxes that would have beencaused by the drop in K-12 funding, it waswilling to tolerate an increase in “higher education taxes” for some of the poorest college students in the country.

A RARE ALLIANCEBefore we examine what this budget will

mean for CUNY, I want to make one thingclear: the PSC commends the Legislature forthe restorations it did make to higher educa-tion, K-12 funding, health care and other ar-eas. The idea that funding for such basic hu-man needs should even be in question in anadvanced industrialized country – or any-where – still strikes me as obscene. But theLegislature did restore deep and debilitatingcuts, forging a rare bipartisan alliance in thefiercely partisan climate of Albany and over-riding a gubernatorial veto. That is not atrivial accomplishment; it took enormousamounts of political work, by the PSC, byour statewide affiliate NYSUT, and by manyother unions and community groups. Therehasn’t been a successful override of a gover-nor’s budget veto in New York State since1982.

And the adopted budget does restore $400million to higher education funding, much ofit in areas that affect CUNY. The governor’sgrotesque proposal of withholding one-thirdof a student’s TAP grant until after gradua-tion was repudiated, as was his plan to cut in

half the financial aid offered by opportunityprograms such as SEEK and to reduce by$345 the per-student support from the statefor community colleges. A small addition toCUNY’s budget will cover mandatory costincreases. Thousands of PSC members whosigned postcards and faxed or called theirlegislators were critical in bringing theserestorations about.

Hard-fought as this battle was, let’s re-member that it was about restorations, notadvances. The Legislature’s unprecedentedpolitical effort was all in service of undoingcuts; it did not even begin the reinvestmentin higher education that would put NewYork on a par with other states.

As union activists beginan assessment of our leg-islative strategy, one thingis already clear. A criticalfactor in the public conver-sation has been the PSC’sanalysis of the University’sfunding history. In the lastthree years we have not on-ly mounted a growing leg-islative effort, we’ve alsorefused to maintain a politesilence about the scan-dalous pattern of under-funding public higher edu-cation in this state. I amconvinced that the refusalto collaborate in the fictionthat all is well in publichigher education is the firststep in breaking the patternof disinvestment in CUNY.That’s one reason it’s im-portant to tell the truthabout the huge bite takenout of CUNY’s state fundingthis year.

This year’s budget re-duces by 12.5% a state ap-propriation that has al-ready been slashed foryears. In real dollars,CUNY has now lost over40% of its state supportsince 1990. Out of a total operating budgetfor CUNY of $1.126 billion, only $580 million,or 51%, will now come from public funding.Student tuition will pay for $504.7 million, or45%, with the remainder coming from thecity’s contribution and other sources. NewYork’s public universities are fast approach-

ing the same level of state support providedto its private universities and colleges. Onedanger of the low level of public funding isthat CUNY will be under pressure to in-crease its reliance on private support. Ex-pect to see even more for-profit ventureswithin the University as the budget squeezetightens.

LEFT OUT OF TAPThe most immediate danger, of course, is

to students. No one knows how many stu-dents will be forced to abandon their collegeeducation because they cannot afford $800-$950 more per year. Nine hundred and fiftydollars may not sound like a lot to legisla-

tors in Albany, but when your family’s annu-al income is under $30,000 – as it is for nearlytwo-thirds of our students – that amountmay well be out of reach. CUNY’s pooreststudents are disproportionately people ofcolor; the tuition increase is a direct, per-haps even a deliberate, assault on their

chances for success in life. Because TAP wasdesigned with a certain kind of student inmind – young, studying full-time, supportedby parents – many low-income CUNY stu-dents are not eligible for its support. Forthem, TAP is not the tightly woven safetynet many assume it to be.

With higher tuition in place, the CUNYadministration will be tempted to step up itscampaign to appeal to an increasingly mid-dle-class population of students. It’s hard notto see the tuition increase as a body blow tothe University’s historic mission.

But the real kicker in this budget may noteven be the $950 increase in store for in-state undergraduates: graduate studentswill also experience increases, and out-of-state students will see their tuition rise byseveral thousand dollars a year. Albany bal-anced the CUNY senior college budget byrequiring the University to collect $32 mil-lion more per year from out-of-state stu-dents. The CUNY Board will have to enterinto the sick calculus of how high to peg

tuition without losing so many students thatthe net effect is a financial loss.

Ten percent of CUNY students are fromout-of-state; they are largely international,rather than from other parts of the US. Inthe doctoral programs in the sciences, over70% of the students are from abroad. Willthese programs, some of the most renownedin the University, be able to survive such ashock? What will happen to the large num-bers of low-income international students atthe community and senior colleges? Andwill we see a rise in community college tu-ition for all students, as the Board feels pres-sure not to allow too big a “price gap” to de-velop between CUNY’s two-year and four-year schools?

The union will be active in all of these de-bates, but however they are resolved, thenature of the University will have beendeeply and insidiously changed by the with-drawal of public funds. If we are to prevail inthe long fight to change the history of under-funding CUNY, we need to start with an in-sistence on the facts.

CUNY & ALBANY

Clarion | May/June 2003 OPINION 11

Behind the news

Newspaper of the Professional Staff Congress/City University of New York, collective bargaining representative of the CUNY instructional staff. Vol. 32, No. 4. PSC/CUNY is affiliated with the American As-sociation of University Professors, the American Federation of Teachers (Local 2334), AFL-CIO, the New York City Central Labor Council and New York State United Teachers. Published by PSC/CUNY, 25West 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036. Telephone: (212) 354-1252. Web site: www.psc-cuny.org. E-mail: phogness@pscmail.org. All opinions expressed in these pages are not necessarily those of the PSC.PSC OFFICERS: Barbara Bowen, President; Steven London, First Vice President; Cecelia McCall, Secretary; John Hyland, Treasurer; Stanley Aronowitz, Jonathan Buchsbaum, Blanche Cook, Susan O’Mal-ley, Sheldon Weinbaum, University-wide Officers; Michael Fabricant, Vice President, Senior Colleges; Robert Cermele, Janice Cline, Nancy Romer, Senior College Officers; Anne Friedman, Vice President,Community Colleges; Samuel E. Farrell, Andrew McInerney, Shirley Rausher, Community College Officers; Iris DeLutro, Vice President, Cross Campus Units; Steven Trimboli, Robbi Weaver, Vera Weekes,Cross Campus Officers; Marcia Newfield, Vice President, Part-Time Personnel; Susan DiRaimo, Diane Menna, Vincent Tirelli, Officers for Part-Time Personnel; Irwin H. Polishook, President Emeritus; IsraelKugler, Deputy President Emeritus; Peter I. Hoberman, Vice President Emeritus, Cross Campus Units.STAFF: Deborah Bell, Executive Director; Mary Ann Carlese, Associate Executive Director; Faye H. Alladin, Coordinator, Financial Services; Debra L. Bergen, Director, Contract Administration & University-wideGrievance Counselor; Mary Crystal Cage, Director, Public Relations; Barbara Gabriel, Coordinator, Office Services and Human Resources; Diana Rosato, Coordinator, Membership Department; D. NicholasRusso, Director, Legal Affairs; Clarissa Gilbert Weiss, Director, Pension and Welfare Benefits.

Editor: Peter Hogness / Assistant Editor: Tomio Geron / Designer: Margarita Aguilar / Intern: Tanvir Raquib© 2003 Professional Staff Congress/CUNY

Clarion MAY/JUNE 2003

The truth about the budget restorations

Jud

Gui

ttea

u

The following is adapted from theAFL-CIO’s “friend of the court” briefin the Supreme Court case Grutter v.Bollinger, a lawsuit challenging af-firmative action in admissions atthe University of Michigan. AFTCounsel David J. Strom was part of the team that wrote the unionbrief, which focuses on employmentdiscrimination.

The AFL-CIO is the largest organi-zation of working men and womenin the United States, consisting ofover 13 million members. Many ofthese members teach, work andstudy on the campuses of publicuniversities and colleges. TheAmerican Federation of Teachers,for example, represents approxi-mately 125,000 faculty and staffmembers at universities and col-leges and over one million teachersand others in public schools.

The experience of the AFL-CIOteaches that the unique opportuni-ties to interact with people from oth-er races and ethnic groups on a uni-versity campus – at the threshold ofthe workplace – that are fostered bythe admissions policies at issue inthis case, will have [a] substantial,positive impact on students, makingthem better citizens in our democ-racy as well as more productivemembers of society.

Public universities donot exist solely to conveybenefits on individuals, advantaging them in thecompetitive market. Public universities exist because,as a nation, we believe inthe value of education – notonly that education makespeople more productive as econom-ic actors, but, more fundamentally,that education makes people bettercitizens of our democracy.

Let us not forget that it was onlyforty years ago that employersopenly discriminated on the basis ofrace. Lamentably, employment dis-crimination is not a thing of the past.

[One] indicator of persistent em-ployment discrimination is the gapbetween the wages earned byAfrican American and White work-ers. A comprehensive review of theliterature concludes, “Such differen-tials have been remarkably persis-tent and have actually increased in

the last 15 years among blacks versus whites.”1 Black and Hispanicmen earn about two-thirds of

what White men earn on an hourly basis and Blackand Hispanic women earnslightly over one-half whatWhite women earn.

Some of the racial gap inhourly and yearly earningscan be explained by differ-ences in education, train-

ing, experience and other legitimatequalifications, but studies revealthat credentials explain less thanhalf of the gap in male workers’earnings.

Direct evidence of the stubbornpersistence of employment discrim-ination is found in empirical re-search using testers. [These findingshave] recently been confirmed in astudy using resumes which wererandomly assigned African Ameri-can or White identified names.

The scholars responded to over1,300 help-wanted ads, sending al-most 5,000 resumes, in each case twohigh-quality and two low-quality,

one of each drawn at random to re-ceive an African American nameand the other a White name. Thestudy found a differential call-backrate of 50% “that can solely be at-tributed to the name manipula-tion...[T]hese results imply that aWhite applicant should expect onaverage one call-back for every 10ads she or he applies to; on the oth-er hand, an African American appli-cant would need to apply to 15 dif-ferent ads to achieve the sameresult.”2 The inescapable conclusionis “that discrimination is an impor-tant factor in why African Ameri-cans do poorly in the labor market.”

While employers seldom ac-knowledge discrimination, surveysof employer and employee attitudesreveal the prejudices that underliesuch unlawful practices. Scholarswho study employment discrimina-tion conclude that “[e]mployersseem to possess strong racial…pref-erences in hiring. These preferencesare the consequence of enduringstereotypical beliefs.”3 Two scholarsof the labor market explain, hiring

“[d]ecisions are often made on limit-ed information – typically, a one-page resume and an interview aver-aging perhaps twenty minutes. It istherefore not surprising that inter-viewers’ judgments of individualsare influenced by generalizationsabout the applicant’s demographicgroup that the interviewer mayhave formed over a lifetime.”4

UNIQUE OPPORTUNITYThe vast majority of Americans

function in segregated settings untilthey reach college. Thus, higher ed-ucation presents a unique opportu-nity and, from the vantage of theworkplace, the last opportunity, tofoster interaction between diverseindividuals. Second, interaction withdiverse individuals during highereducation is likely to produce posi-tive results due both to students’stage of intellectual, social and moraldevelopment and to the unique envi-ronment on college campuses.

[As] University of Michigan Psy-chology Professor Patricia Gurin ex-plained in her expert report, “Thelong-term pattern of racial separa-tion noted by many social scientistscan be broken by diversity experi-ences in higher education,” therebylessening stereotypes, prejudicesand fears as well as the resulting dis-crimination such separation breeds.

[Research indicates] that contactbetween groups, under the correctconditions, reduces prejudice. Thistheory has been tested and validat-ed in countless studies. A survey ofthe literature reports, “The idea thatfamiliarity breeds positivity hasusually been sustained.”5

Sustained, individual contact withdiverse students during higher edu-

cation provokes critical thinking andbreaks down stereotypes preciselybecause it contradicts the “general-izations” [of prejudice] which areformed during earlier, ordinarilysegregated stages of life. The empir-ical research demonstrates not onlythat students carry the lessonslearned from interaction with di-verse peers into adulthood, it specif-ically demonstrates that they carrythose lessons into the workplace.

While many factors contribute tothis positive relationship betweendesegregated education and inte-grated work lives, it is clear that oneimportant factor is the lessening ofnegative racial stereotypes amongboth African American and Whitestudents. In plain terms, “cross-racecontacts in desegregated schools re-duce White students’ negative racialstereotypes and fears of hostile re-actions in interracial situations,[making] these White students asadults. . .less resistant to Blacks being admitted into coworker. . .groups.” “Whites in desegregatedschools frequently show a decreasein their often initially high levels offear and avoidance of African Amer-icans, and an increasing willingnessand ability to work with them.”6

Three of the principal scholars in-volved in this research conclude,“We now have considerable evi-dence that school desegregation is anecessary step to insure equality ofeconomic opportunity to minoritiesin US society.”7

1) Altonji & Blank, “Race and Gender in the LaborMarket,” in Ashenfelter & Card, eds., Handbook ofLabor Economics, 1999.2) Bertrand & Mullainathan, “Are Emily and BrendanMore Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A FieldExperiment on Labor Market Discrimination,” U. ofChicago School of Business Working Paper, 2002.3) Darity & Mason, “Evidence on Discrimination,” J.of Econ Perspectives, 12, 1998.4) Bendick & Jackson, “Measuring Discrimination,”Review of Black Political Economy, 23, 1994.5) Sigelman et al., “Making Contact?”, Am. J. Soc. 101,1996.6) Braddock & McCartland, “Social PsychologicialProcesses,” J. of Black Studies, 19, 1989; andSchofield, “Review of Research,” in Banks, ed., Hand-book of Research on Multicultural Education, 1995.7) Braddock et al., “A Long-Term View,” Phi DeltaKappan, 66, 1984.

12 NEWS FEATURE Clarion | May/June 2003

15–MINUTE ACTIVIST

The PSC has been pushing for legisla-tion to include CUNY employees in theTransitChek program, which lets youpay for public transit with pre-tax dol-lars. This can save as much as $400per year. Go to the PSC Web site(www.psc-cuny.org) and click on “ActNow” to send a fax to your legislatorabout this bill. The letter also urgesaction on unemployment benefits foradjuncts (see p. 9) and pension equity(see p. 7).

AFL-CIO on education and the workplace

Tens of thousands of demonstrators marched in front of the Supreme Court’s building on April 1 to defend affirmative action.

Lee

Fela

rca

Affirmative action & the university

Employmentdiscriminationis not athing ofthe past.

Chek it outProfessional Staff Congress/CUNY25 West 43rd StreetNew York, New York 10036

THIRD CLASS MAIL

NonProfit Org.U.S. Postage

PAIDNew York, N.Y.Permit No. 8049