"I'm sorry we have to meet here again," my TA said as he sat down in a chair intended for a six-year-old and glanced around the Sunday-school classroom the unions had assigned to our section, "but we're stuck here until the Administration decides it's ready to bargain."
None of us challenged his skewed view of the labor conflict. By then, there wasn't much point. The TA was only saying out loud what our professor had implied for the last two weeks by moving class off-campus: Yale's refusal to concede to the unions' demands is the sole cause of our discomfort.
The unions moved our lecture, too. Unable to give us a lecture hall, they put us in a cramped, uncomfortable room with poor acoustics and no blackboard. Sitting there, I realized our professor had drafted us into a protest.
He said his decision was the only "neutral" act possible. "Neutral" acts are popular these days. On a campus divided by a labor conflict, their appeal is obvious: why offend either side of the labor conflict if you don't have to?
Unfortunately, the unions have their own definition of "neutral."
"Crossing a picket line, even to attend class, is not a neutral act," a pro-union Yale Daily News column declared the day the unions announced their strike plan. If there's a Local 35 strike, doing work "that union workers normally do," even if you don't get paid, also isn't a "neutral" act. Taking your trash to the dumpster, even if your entryway smells awful, is a political act.
What is "neutral" by the unions' definition? Giving money to striking workers. A letter from the Chaplain's Office soliciting contributions to its Hardship Fund for striking workers insists that such donations aren't "pro-union," but "humanitarian." Of course, the unions also give money to striking workers, and GESO conducted a fund-raising screening last night to benefit that same Chaplain's fund. Are the unions and GESO also "neutral?"
A neutral person should use a neutral definition of "neutral." If you don't help either side, that's neutral. Going to class is a neutral act. So is entering the library. So is holding classes where the Registrar asks professors to hold classes. So is cleaning up after yourself during a Local 35 strike. None of these things help Yale. Refusing to do them helps the unions.
Taking classes out of Yale classrooms, for example, is a political statement. Pro-union professors sometimes stay on campus, but anti-union professors never move off campus. There's a reason for that. An off-campus move gives the unions a power they shouldn't have: the ability to affect academic operations unrelated to their work.
Boycotting Yale classrooms as if they were grapes or Dakota J's is a political act. Yale asked our professor to keep classes on campus, the unions asked him to move, and he moved. The unions erected their imaginary "picket lines" around classroom buildings partly to create a loyalty test. In a strike where less than a quarter of Yale's unionized workers have walked out, students' worst inconvenience is professors' zeal to pass that test.
Going to class, taking books from the library, and cleaning up after yourself are neutral acts. They're things you do normally. When you "cross picket lines" to attend class or check out a book, you aren't hurting anyone. Walking into a Yale building isn't a show of support for the Administration; it's using a facility you've already paid for.
Nothing changes if Local 35 walks out. If you sweep the floor outside your suite-work a Local 35 custodian would normally do-you aren't a subcontractor. If you do the same thing when Local 35 goes on strike, you aren't a "scab." If you refuse to do what you'd normally do to keep your home livable, you aren't being "neutral." You're joining the strike.
Question why you want to be "neutral" at all. Don't buy into the argument that students should have no say in labor disputes, or that any student who questions the unions' position is a "spoiled brat." Yale isn't asking for concessions so that it can buy gold drapes for the Corporation Room. They're after well-run dining halls that don't lose money and a contract fair to both sides. The unions have offered students higher tuition. No one will criticize you for staying "neutral," but aren't you better off taking a stand?
Copyright 1996, The Yale Herald, Inc. All rights reserved.
This article may be freely distributed electronically, provided it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice, but may not be reprinted without the express written permission of The Yale Herald, Inc. Write to herald@yale.edu for additional details.