 |
||
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The Yale Alumni Magazine is owned and operated by Yale Alumni Publications, Inc., a nonprofit corporation independent of Yale University. The content of the magazine and its website is the responsibility of the editors and does not necessarily reflect the views of Yale or its officers. |
|
Regarding “States of a Union” (Oct.) and the debate over whether Yale graduate students should be allowed to unionize, I have an opinion based on my brief month or so as a TA for introductory astronomy, before I had to end my graduate career at Yale because of medical problems. I found my TA experience exhilarating. How could I ally myself more closely with other graduate students than with faculty? I couldn’t. Just as faculty would find ridiculous the suggestion that they unionize, I find ridiculous the suggestion that what I found to be a strong link to a distinguished academic career might (because of the decision of other students) be subjugated to the call to strike against the position of the institution. I was a good graduate student in a way I never, or rarely, was as an undergraduate at Yale, and I wonder why other graduate students at Yale feel in any way threatened by the general conditions under which they work. They were picked carefully, cer- tainly. I’m not suggesting that it’s the less able who strive to unionize. I’m suggesting that we are all asked at a certain point to align ourselves according to our higher values. As a Yale graduate student, I would have opposed unionization because I felt at the time a need to align myself with the faculty and the institution, and was organizing my life accordingly. I hope that higher values serve every participant in the debate and that whatever is decided at whatever level, the best result, for the institution and for every graduate student, is achieved.
You usually do a decent job of reporting on Yale with some objectivity, but the article “States of a Union” was terribly biased. You write, for instance, “there is no certainty at Yale that GESO can capture a majority of cards—or votes, if it ever came to an election,” while ignoring that GESO has already demonstrated that a majority of grad students want this union, both in a 1995 election (supervised by the League of Women Voters) and, after GESO extended its coverage to the sciences, in a 1998 petition calling on President Levin to negotiate with us. “GESO is not about to go away,” you correctly observed, but you failed to explain why so many grad students have supported GESO for so long. Your article leaves the impression that grad students join GESO because of delusions about our worker status and weird hopes that unionization will somehow improve the dismal academic job market we’ll face after Yale. Your article fully described administrators' charges against GESO while failing to explain the reasons why we, and many other graduate students who are also alumni, have all joined GESO over the last decade. We joined GESO because we’ve seen that GESO’s calls for changes at Yale have been effective, despite the administration’s rhetoric denying that smaller section sizes, longer library hours, larger and universal stipends for grad students, better health coverage, English-language training for international grad students, teacher- preparation workshops, and many more improvements are all responses to GESO demands. We joined GESO because we'd like to see more diversity among our fellow grad students (the percentage of African Americans in the Graduate School hovers around one percent, as far as we can tell!) and we think higher pay and better conditions will help. We joined GESO because it’s one of the strongest voices at Yale urging that life-saving drugs that we’ve helped develop, such as the AIDS drug d4T, be made accessible to all who need them. We joined GESO because we’ve watched our fellow grad students face sudden pay cuts in the middle of nearly every semester: pay cuts made without informing us, pay cuts that wouldn’t happen if we simply had a written contract, pay cuts that have only been overturned whenever we have organized collectively. We joined GESO because (contrary to administrators' ideas about sacred mentoring relationships) we think that individually negotiating hours and wages with our faculty advisers does not improve our relations with them. We joined GESO because (contrary to administrators' references to freedom of speech), we know that under U.S. law, grad student unions don’t have the right to negotiate matters of curriculum, only matters of basic working conditions that would give us the freedom to teach better. We joined GESO because we recognize that the apprentice-relationship President Levin likes to talk about was never that pleasant for apprentices themselves until unions gave apprentices more power. Anyone who thinks that GESO hasn’t already improved the teaching conditions of grad students, and thus the education of Yale undergrads, is missing the full and objective story. Anyone glancing at the Alumni Notes in the back of this magazine can see that Yale forges a very different relationship with its grad students than with its undergrads. Until Yale fully respects individual grad students, we will have to work collectively. And until Yale recognizes all four of its unions (Local 34 of clerical and technical employees, Local 35 of service and maintenance employees, District 1199 at Yale–New Haven Hospital, and GESO), many of us are withholding our alumni donations.
A Little Respect I intended to write this letter after reading the graduation article in the Summer Yale Alumni Magazine. In light of the life-changing events of September 11, and after reading John Delury's letter in the October issue, the urgency to convey a message in response is clear. When reading the opinions expressed by Delury and a vocal constituency of Yale University regarding the honorary degree that Yale awarded to President George W. Bush, I am greatly saddened. I can only attribute their rhetoric to the dangerous notion that pure intellectualism (as determined by grades, number of publications and external laurels) is the sole determinant of a person’s worthiness and wisdom. Delury needs to know that once he leaves our sheltered Ivory Tower as a graduate student fellow, he will learn quickly that the harsh realities of the real world require not only what a few academics deem important. The greater world relies on academic review, but also on common sense, an open mind, tenacity, and character—qualities of which our president has an ample supply. As a physician, a Yalie, and a compassionate human being, I can learn from a man who has faced addiction, conquered it, and professed it. In spite of such a handicap, he has become the leader of the free world. Yes, we might even respect him. As a woman of color, I can tell you that I appreciate a man who has learned to judge men and women by their merits and not by their color. In no other administration can we point out a National Security Adviser like the powerhouse Condoleeza Rice and a Secretary of State with the quiet strength of General Colin Powell. In addition, the Bush administration’s ability to see the importance of our neighbor, Mexico, is unprecedented—as is Bush’s own relationship with President Vincente Fox. The administration does not make token appointments for political showboating. It is clear who is advising the president during our country’s greatest trials. As a Christian, I can learn from our president, who unabashedly professes his strong faith in spite of political repercussions. Yet, he can still reach out to those of different faiths. He makes a strong distinction between political actions made in the name of Islam and the true religious teachings of Islam. He defends the right of Israel to exist and hopes to extend this right for a Palestinian state. I believe that his example is a credit to all those who profess any religious faith. Last, but not least important: As a mother, I laud the president and the first lady for their focus on education and the emotional welfare of our children. The socialist British prime minister Tony Blair, once a strong supporter of former president Clinton, states that our current president is “extraordinarily focused. He will make up his mind but also listens to other minds.” Can Mr. Delury say the same of those who responded to President Bush’s introduction at Commencement with “boos, hisses, and catcalls"? Was there such a reception from the politically right towards Hillary Clinton? I suspect not. President Bush’s self-effacing humor, humility, and good-natured character make him credible. If he had continued to put on airs and act as erudite as many of our fellow Yalies unfortunately do, he would have been chided for being, as you write, “alternately bored, tired, smug, and uncomfortable.” With the reception and disrespect that Yale students gave our commander-in-chief, I would not have faulted him for just walking out. Instead, he graciously received the fruits of our First Amendment and demonstrated the strength of character and self respect that you and your colleagues tried so hard to steal from him. You could not. Remember that he is sending men and women to die for your very right to disagree with him. You disgrace yourselves and our country when you treat our president in such a manner. In actuality, you made yourselves “a national laughingstock,” not our president. I have never been as proud of being a Christian, an American, or a Yale graduate as I am today. It is an honor to have George W. Bush '68 as our president. He deserves his honorary degree from Yale University. And more, he deserves our respect.
Missing the Boat As a longtime believer in all of the educational opportunities Yale offers its undergraduates, and as an alumna who recognizes all I gained from my years in New Haven, I look forward to reading about current campus happenings via the Web sites and the Yale Alumni Magazine. However, your failure to recognize the achievements of the women’s crew this summer left me feeling disheartened. While I am a fan of Yale teams and an admirer of many coaches, I look forward to reading about women’s teams as well as men's. During my readership years, the Yale Alumni Magazine has done an increasingly better job of spotlighting standout performances by women’s teams, athletes, and coaches. But your October issue missed the boat—literally. While it was good news that the lightweight men’s crews had another outstanding season and returned to Henley with all of the crews as part of the Tercentennial celebration, there was no mention of the momentous performance of the women’s crew. The women made their first international trip, won the Women’s Henley Regatta, qualified for the Royal Henley Regatta, and raced in the final of the Henley Prize against the Australian national eight (a crew that would go on to win the world championships in August). Yes, the Australians did win the final in a demonstrative fashion, but the women’s experiences in England and their racing performances are of historical significance to the program. Given the strong tradition of rowing that many Yale women have built over the years, it would have been terrific for all of us to read about a women’s team on the rise, enjoying a regatta experience so long reserved for men only. I’m also confident that many of our male friends feel similarly.
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||
©1992–2012, Yale Alumni Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. Yale Alumni Magazine, P.O. Box 1905, New Haven, CT 06509-1905, USA. yam@yale.edu |
||