Staff Editorial: Vote no on unionization

Today and tomorrow, graduate students will cast their ballots on an issue that has been at the forefront of campus discussion for more than a year. Some will heed the call of GET-UP and vote to have the American Federation of Teachers represent them in contract negotiations. Others will choose to preserve the status quo. The two sides have fundamentally different beliefs on classifying the work done by graduate students. The University steadfastly believes that the teaching work graduate students perform is strictly part of their academic experience. GET-UP supporters believe that this work goes beyond their role as students and entitles them to employee status as well. Whether or not you agree that graduate students can also be employees, the fact remains that their primary purpose at this school is to learn. Graduate students are part of the University's "core mission" because they are here to receive an education, and that mission supercedes their job responsibilities. We have carefully evaluated the potential effects that a graduate student union would have on this campus. In doing so, we believe that it is in the best interest of Penn graduate students to vote against forming a union over the next two days. GET-UP makes many valid claims about the work that graduate students do and the lack of reward they receive for their efforts. And as precedent shows, they are likely correct in assuming that, initially, a union would provide them with higher stipends and a somewhat stronger healthcare plan -- despite Penn's claims that the money for this does not exist. However, we disagree with GET-UP members on their other two major platform positions. GET-UP members claim that a union would provide them with a stronger voice in negotiations with the University and would see to it that students are treated more "fairly" by the University with regard to their working conditions. While the voice of a union would certainly be stronger, it would be far less individualized. A union would negotiate a "one-size-fits-all" system, keeping graduate students from having their individual needs heard. The addition of a union will only increase the amount of red tape that students have to hurdle in order to have their voice heard on relevant issues. And because the union will strictly negotiate terms of employment for graduate students, it can do little to assure them "fair" treatment by their department chairmen and dissertation advisers. A union could not ensure that the University provides office space or that the graduate chairman of a department respects his students. If graduate students want to vote for a union strictly on the monetary issues at hand, they will likely see short-term gains. But it seems as though these issues run deeper, and in this situation, we believe a union is not the answer to these concerns. Additionally, we have issues with the makeup of the current bargaining unit. While it may be formed according to legal precedent, we believe it will provide significant problems down the road. With the possibility of students moving in and out of the union depending on the semester, the system on the table will result in more confusion than it is worth. A class with one unionized TA and one outside the bargaining unit could have an unintended effect on the quality of undergraduate education, something that graduate students should not be willing to risk. We are not saying that all aspects of unionization are detrimental. We do believe, however, that the current circumstances do not lend themselves well to the proposed union. With that in mind, we must recommend that you vote no on unionization. Whether you agree with us or not, you must vote in this election. Even though the results will not be immediate, the implication of this election is too great for you to ignore your voting responsibilities.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.