GESO presses on despite NLRB dismissal

The dismissal of the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) case against Yale on behalf of the Graduate Employees and Students Organization (GESO) this summer has left many on campus asking, "Where does GESO go from here?" While GESO's summer defeat may have seemed definitive, the group continues to make themselves heard on campus and appeal its case nationally.

Calling the dismissal "a set of legal events that doesn't really concern us," GESO chair Antony Dugdale, GRD '99, promises that the graduate student organization will spend this year "identifying graduate concerns, and preparing to unify and unionize." In fact, Dugdale said that the decision actually helped GESO's drive to unionize. "By dismissing the case on the grounds that the grade strike was a partial strike and thus not protected by labor law, the judge implied that he recognized us as employees," Dugdale said.

At the same time, NLRB regional attorney Jonathan Kreisberg said that the NLRB plans to appeal administrative law judge Michael Miller's decision on Sat., Sept. 26. If the appeal is successful, the case will return to administrative court, where the trial would continue. Regardless of the result, Kreisberg predicted that a lengthy appeals process will bring the case to the full five-member NLRB board in Washington.

University lawyers are confident that the courts will continue to rule in their favor. Deputy Director of Public Relations Tom Conroy said that he believes that "the university will prevail throughout any appeals process."

In the meantime, GESO is working to address graduate student concerns on the homefront. At the top of their list is preventing the implementation of last year's Kutzinski report, a hotly debated plan that would overhaul graduate student teaching. GESO members used a Wed., Sept. 17, "speak-out" in HGS to voice their concerns over the report.

Other graduate students are particularly concerned about changes made this summer reducing the maximum number of sections Part Time Acting Instructors (PTAIs) can teach from three to two per year. GESO members fear that the summer change represents the first steps in the implementation of the Kutzinski report, which recommends that undergraduate classes use teaching fellows (TFs) less often.

According to Associate Dean of the Graduate School Andrew Moore, the Administration was concerned that teaching extra sections was "impeding the students' research. Students were complaining that it was not clear that [teaching more than one section per semester] was voluntary." Moore pointed out that the policy change--which has not yet been officially implemented--was made after months of discussion with graduate students. Moore now wants "to gradually phase it in, and see how the changes affect students."

However, Language Caucus member Rachel Sulkes, GRD '01, tells a different story. She labeled Moore's claim that grad students were consulted "hard to believe," saying instead that "individual [graduate students] were not appraised of the situation at all." In fact, according to Sulkes, many directors of undergraduate studies in the University's language departments were also shocked by the changes.

Furthermore, Sulkes was unaware of any students who felt coerced into teaching three sections per year. "In the German department, we dream of getting three sections. PTAIs wanted the valuable teaching experience and the extra income," she said.

Sulkes also asserted that the change in policy was an attempt to weaken GESO's argument that grad students should be recognized as employees. "I do believe there is a link between the language changes made and the [NLRB] court case," Sulkes said, noting that under the old policy, those PTAIs who taught two sections in a semester were awarded health care from the University. "It tacitly says, `We are going to fund you when you work more hours,' and that makes PTAIs look like employees," weakening the University's claims that TFs are primarily students.

Such issues will occupy GESO's time in the upcoming year. As Dugdale said, "The NLRB trial is water under the bridge at this point. We are primarily concerned with improving the day-to-day aspects of graduate work."

Back to News...