The union on strike was the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 3299, which has about 730 employees at Berkeley. As has been widely reported, the strike threat was a response to UC’s failure to pay service workers a living wage, or one commensurate with those at comparable institutions, such as those in the CSU and state community college system. In fact, service workers are paid 15 percent less than those in the California State University system, 26 percent less than those in community colleges. In absolute terms, the average service worker’s annual compensation is less than $17,000 a year. The strike had strong support from State Assemblymember Wilma Chan and Berkeley mayor Tom Bates (who promised to speak at the rally but, ironically enough, got stuck in the traffic backup from we strikers walking the streets). In the midst of celebrating his inauguration as new Chancellor at Berkeley, Robert Birgeneau stepped out to meet with us, stating, “I know that, since I grew up living on a minimum wage, what it’s like to scrape by on an absolutely minimal salary.” (There was a somewhat silly moment when a student working in one of the dining halls objected to Birgeneau’s pay, stating, “I don’t even know what the hell the chancellor does anyway,” but in general all of the speakers were on topic.)

What accounts for the difference in wages for UC workers? Certainly no distinction in the kind of work that these folks (mostly janitors and residence hall dining workers) do. When it comes to cleaning toilets, there’s nothing very special about working for Berkeley. While all cafeterias and bathrooms are alike, it’s actually worse for those employees struggling to get by in a community where the average home price is over 600K. Many of the folks who spoke at yesterday’s rally have kids, and need to live an hour’s drive outside Berkeley in order to find a place to live. Add to that increasing gas prices and the fact that these folks have to pay to park (yes, finding room for the Klingon spaceship in Golden Gate Park in Star Trek IV was easier than parking your ordinary vehicle around UC Berkeley), and you have a serious financial crisis on your hands. Another of the workers spoke at the rally about her daughter, a high-school senior who decided she can’t afford to go to the university where her mom works. (Today, April 15, is the due date not just for those 1040s, but for an even bigger form: that which indicates where students are going to go to college.) Much of the blame for the poverty of these workers must rest on the shoulders of the University; they have decided to allocate a smaller part of their budget on paying these folks. Compare a UC Berkeley bathroom to a bathroom at one of the CalStates I’ve seen and you’ll immediately notice the difference: the Berkeley one is cleaned far less often, is much more likely to be closed, and in general is only slightly preferable to the ARCO station on University Ave.

The excellent CalStuff blog has strong coverage of the whole strike, and I don’t think I could add much in the way of general reportage. While AFSCME’s case seems pretty clear, I think it would be worthwhile to explain why I as a teacher would take part in an event that may not appear to concern me. I can see the objection that, as a teacher, I have the luxury to participate in an event that would be comparatively much more painful for others. In more time-intensive professions like driving a bus, staying away from work for one day would meet with retribution. I acknowledge the difference, but I do think that the gap between service workers and intellectual labor can be exaggerated.

A bit of history to explain what I mean. In Fall 1998, graduate student employees across the campuses of the University successfully organized to gain recognition as a union. The coalition included people like me, who were employed by UC at the time, and sympathetic fellow grad students, such as the esteemed Pepper herself. In 1998 the issue was not about our wages or health benefits, our or about any aspect of our livelihood. It was much simpler: it concerned the university administration’s presumption that faculty should continue to exert total domination over grad students. This may sound like an overstatement, but it’s simply a summary of many administrators’ literally paternalistic response to the prospect of unionization. For instance, UC Irvine’s Dean of Graduate Studies, Frederick Wan, gave this response to the unionizers: “If the children want better pocket money, do the parents negotiate with them? Over the issue of whether they wash dishes and mow the lawn, should the parents bargain with them formally?” (Christian Science Monitor, 3 November 1998) And while speaking in a less polemical way, Robin Fisher, Associate Dean of Graduate Division at UCLA, diagnosed the issue in the same way: “The fundamental issues here are intergenerational conflicts....The authority resides with those folks who are older and more experienced, but the energy resides with those who are younger and who would like to have the authority” (Chronicle of Higher Education, 13 November 1998).

This parent-child metaphor was, of course, completely inaccurate as a description of the situation. While it might be possible (though hardly ideal) to make the relationship between faculty mentor and grad student resemble that between parent and child, it is inaccurate to say that grad students serving as instructors work for faculty. As teachers, graduate students work for the university at large. In my three courses no professor ever observed my classes or checked how my teaching was going, much less paid me an allowance out of his or her pocket. The issue was that, frankly, I don’t think Fred Wan or any other professor would want to assume the duties of a parent toward me. C’mon, Fred, aren’t you going to leave the light on for me?

My intent in telling this anecdote is that Fred Wan unintentionally got close to the heart of the matter. Instead of identifying us teachers with children, he should have compared us to other service workers, like gardeners (or, for that matter, cooks, janitors, or the other members of AFSCME). Since we don’t get the benefits of Dr. Wan’s fine parenting skills, I am thankful that we at least now get treated as workers who have a union to represent us. And therein lies our strength as recognized members of the university community.