<p>I think a significant part of the story is the medical bills the adjunct had. She would not have had health insurance through Duke, and on her salary, it would have been difficult for her to afford health insurance personally. Even if she had insurance, a lot of insurance policies will not cover 100% of the hospital costs.</p>
<p>Also, I think that the adjunct’s age needs to be taken into account, when one is looking at her career choices over a lifetime. She was 83 when she died. When she started working, the employment opportunities for most women were very much more circumscribed than they are now.</p>
<p>I think that the pay policy of a Catholic university ought to be assessed in light of Catholic teaching, particularly since they are quite specific on the topic of a just wage.</p>
<p>No, not a job at night. Corrected to: sitting there working. Presumably prep, grading, thinking, etc. It’s corrected somewhere in the vast commentary on this lady.</p>
<p>The Eat n Park references are confusing because one person says she actually worked there and another says she did “research” there and would sleep in a booth there on occasion. This restaurant is only blocks from her house.</p>
<p>lookingforward has a good point there, post 144. She convinced the author she could take care of herself, and to call social services to prevent their stepping in, and 2 hours later, according the author she was unconscious near death. The author must be embarrassed about his call.</p>
<p>I understand that during the best of times in the last 25 yrs, she made 25k a yr. Nothing to brag about, but enough for a single person to live on, at least in my area.
What I didn’t see was what choices did she make when she was first able to work, at say, 16 or 18. Did she go to college right after h.s.? What choices did she make then?
She had over 40 yrs opportunity to work and save and prepare for old age. Did she do so? We really don’t know as the article makes no mention. I find the omission suspicious. I would have thought the author would have detailed what a frugal saver this woman was during those working years to bolster his opinion, had this been the case. </p>
<p>From the article, I can’t conclude she brought it all on herself due to poor choices; though omission of facts hints that. I also cannot conclude this terrible end was forced upon her despite her best efforts.</p>
<p>We have insurance and will have post-retirement health care benefits on top of Medicare. We have also saved a lot. But I am actually not certain that we could handle truly major medical costs that insurance does not cover, in some of the worst-case scenarios.</p>
<p>I am not sure that anyone outside the top 10% in income can save enough that he/she would not be bankrupted by the out-of-pocket expenses for some types of medical care (at least, as of the time that this woman died).</p>
<p>Many companies have looked at their work force & have concluded that to reduce costs, it is preferable to reduce hours for employees, so they will be considered part time & thereby no longer eligible for benefits.
Universities across the country are guilty of this as much as retail businesses. </p>
<p>I don’t know what lookingforward’s experience is. My experience is 2-2 or 2-3 as a normal teaching load. With that as a baseline, this woman was working more than full-time, at least during the “best times”. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am also googling around to try and see whether adjuncts qualify for tiaa cref. It seems to vary. I doubt their employers are matching?</p>
<p>How would y’all know what a FT tenure load is, across the country? Different senior faculty may have different arrangements, all depending.</p>
<p>Friend at a CSU taught 5 per semester, until his recent semi-retirement. Some schools will trade a class for administrative resps- it just depends.</p>
<p>Duquesne
Non-tenure full-time: 12 credits/4 courses. These are not adjuncts.</p>
<p>“The adjunct faculty is comprised of individuals who teach up to 6 credit/contact hours per term at the University. Exceptions to this limit may be made by the Dean of the College/School. As a rule, adjuncts are responsible only for teaching.” From the faculty handbook. </p>
<p>Tenured: “The normal instructional load consists of 12 hours per week or 24 credit hours or equivalent per academic year with no more than three different course preparations per semester.” In other words: 4 courses per semester.</p>
<p>No “perhaps” about it. Any prof who is on tenure track or desires to get on a tenure track is definitely conducting research in addition to teaching classes. No such research requirement for adjuncts.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What exactly is that supposed to mean? Should Duquense pay what Harvard pays? Should D pay an adjunct for not teaching; French is not so popular a language right now, and is getting cut at many colleges, so the demand for faculty is less.</p>
<p>lookingforward: I know many tenured faculty all across the country. I know quite a few adjuncts, all across the country. Generally my adjunct friends are teaching the same number of classes per term, as my tenured friends, or more. Of course, tenured faculty have additional responsibilities. I am just trying to follow your argument as to what appropriate adjunct pay should be… based on number of hours worked.</p>
<p>assigning fault to the victim assumes that someone was victimized. I think this lady is like all of us who live with the results of choices we make in life. I know that I would never call this woman a victim because its so demeaning to her and I don’t know her.</p>
<p>I also don’t advocate for amorality in human relationships and how we treat one another but I steadfastly resist the imposition of ones morality upon another. You living wage people are making a moral argument that you want to impose on others against their will. That is tyrannical and we will always disagree. I would not complain though if she got paid $300,000/year as an adjunct instead of the low pay she willingly worked for. It’s nobody’s business to impose their will on her or her employer.</p>
<p>If you argue that it’s ok to impose your morality on others in the law then your desire will open a can of worms you can never again close.</p>
<p>I am saying that after some time, faculty can sometimes get a RIC, reduction in courseload. Or, sometimes, for admin resps or certain committee work. or because of the value of their research and publications. If you can presume I am wrong (despite what Duq prints,) then I can presume you are. Let’s not have an impasse. And, let’s NOT assume what a union guy wrote about how much she worked is true. We already know he replaced some accuracy with style.</p>
<p>I only know a few adjuncts who can paste together 3 classes- and most I know are splitting time among several colleges. </p>
<p>And, I quoted from the Duquesne faculty handbook, not my imagination.</p>
<p>AND, I don’t have an idea what appropriate pay is- I did ask for ideas and got none. And I did figure that, for 9 hours/week, 3500 is the equivalent of something over 40k.</p>
<p>Now, if you want to call whatever it is she taught (do we know, other than the last class?) the same as full time and ask for a FT salary…what are we supposed to say? I don’t know where this is pulled from. Even if her, say, TWO classes match what you know someone is teaching, somewhere- does that mean she is the equivalent of a full-timer, with the addl resps and expectations? Or just that she is teaching two classes?</p>
<p>Perhaps time has come to address what the real problem in higher education really is. The above statement should speak volumes about why the economic models used in education are starting to fall apart. </p>
<p>To be clear, the problem might not be the over-reliance of adjuncts who teach a couple of classes a semester, but that we cannot get away from the idea that teaching a couple of classes ought to be considered a full-time load. </p>
<p>Oh I know that that the “excusers” will come up with the same sad and hollow rhetoric about the demands of preparing for classes, office hours, and more of the same. The bottom line? Some are exploited because their pay does not correspond directly to the “norm” and hardly to what the revenues of a class should bring to the teacher. But, plenty are on other side of the exploitation as the beneficiaries of low teaching loads, sabbaticals, and plenty of other perks that make their employment a glorified sinecure. </p>
<p>And the worst part, is that they do not even realize if as it has become the norm! Just as the armies of public servants we love to maintain.</p>
<p>Gawd, the conspiracies abound. We haven’t even settled on what is normal and everyone’s pointing fingers. I’m smelling gamesmanship. Sad and hollow, indeed. Watch the inclination to go for style. Recognize it when you read it. And, God Bless us, everyone.</p>
<p>xiggi: the good news for you is you will probably live to see the end of what you consider glorified sinecure. I’ll probably be dead so I don’t really care.</p>
<p>Re bluebayou, #152: I think that as a Catholic university, Duquesne ought to pay what the Catholic Church thinks Duquesne ought to pay, without regard to what Harvard pays its adjuncts, or what Southeast Monongahela Valley Community College pays its adjuncts.</p>
<p>What the Catholic Church thinks Duquesne should pay depends on the actual number of hours Duquesne anticipated that the woman would be spending on her teaching responsibilities–although I think they probably should pay a bit more, to the extent that their scheduling precluded her from fitting other work in between class meetings. I don’t know what number of hours per week Duquesne thought she was working, total.</p>
<p>Madaboutx: I am not suggesting imposing my morality on anyone. I am suggesting imposing the Catholic Church’s morality on a Catholic institution. I don’t know what a “just” wage would be in this case, because I don’t know how long the university thought it would take the woman to meet her teaching responsibilities (looking at the time before she may have been slowed down by poor health).</p>
<p>It is not clear to me that the woman would have been unable to make ends meet, had she not had large out-of-pocket medical expenses.</p>