Speaker 1: Hello, podcast fans, it's me today, It's James. It's only James.
Speaker 1: We're giving you some updates on the UC strike, but
Speaker 1: we recorded these before some changes happened. Progress you could
Speaker 1: call it. Maybe it's not progress, depends on where you're
Speaker 1: at a position wise with that. But there are two
Speaker 1: interviews today. One's going to explain a little bit about
Speaker 1: the bargaining and the differences between rank and fire on
Speaker 1: the bargaining team. The other one is going to explain
Speaker 1: the very important and radical and and progressive access needs
Speaker 1: demands that were made. And it seems like ultimately not
Speaker 1: at least I'm not on the table in this tentative agreement.
Speaker 1: So that's a tentative agreement out for voting right now.
Speaker 1: If you have been on the internet today Saturday, and
Speaker 1: if you've been on today, you will have seen it
Speaker 1: presented as if the strike was over. That's not necessarily
Speaker 1: the case, right The contractors up for ratification and it's
Speaker 1: ratified by union members who have to vote on it.
Speaker 1: A number of people who are organizing for a no vote,
Speaker 1: especially people who are in department, saw parts of the
Speaker 1: university which would qualify follower tears of pay. The contract
Speaker 1: has tiered pay, has tiered pay both geographically and depict
Speaker 1: based on what kind of work you're doing. Um So,
Speaker 1: a lot of people who are left at the bottom
Speaker 1: of those tears are obviously feeling like they've they've been
Speaker 1: out of strike for five weeks and haven't got what
Speaker 1: they wanted. A lot of people who run those higher
Speaker 1: tears are also feeling like they should be expressing solidarity
Speaker 1: with their fellow workers at the bottom. But you will
Speaker 1: have seen like a lot of reporting. Some of it
Speaker 1: came up very very quickly after the after the attentative
Speaker 1: agreement was made, which it's odd and perhaps is because
Speaker 1: the union appears to be the union staff. I should
Speaker 1: say to people who are who are making these some
Speaker 1: of the people who are who are in favor of
Speaker 1: this contractor using a PR company which appears to have
Speaker 1: maybe seeded some stories and some publications, but we can't
Speaker 1: be sure. Certainly they were very quick to press. So
Speaker 1: I would urge you to listen to this as sort
Speaker 1: of a coda to some of what you might be reading.
Speaker 1: There are two things. You can listen to them separately.
Speaker 1: You can listen one after the other. We won't have
Speaker 1: any podcasts for a while over there, open to break,
Speaker 1: so I will speak to you again in the new year.
Speaker 1: And I hope you enjoyed both these interviews. Mohammed, can
Speaker 1: you just explain, first of all, tell folks at which
Speaker 1: campus you're at and maybe what you're studying and where
Speaker 1: you are in the in the giant structure that is,
Speaker 1: like the U A W, U C S D. Yeah. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: so I'm at you see San Diego. UM, I'm a
Speaker 1: fifth year in the PhD program in the Department of
Speaker 1: Ethnic Studies. And yeah, I specifically study like Muslim racialization
Speaker 1: and sectarianism in the US UM. And how that, Yeah,
Speaker 1: how that looks up to like imperialism, settler colonialism, UM,
Speaker 1: gender formations, things like that. UM. And I suppose my
Speaker 1: place within this, as you say, like the labyrinth of U, C,
Speaker 1: S D, ANU A W politics. UM. Right now, I'm
Speaker 1: just a ranking final member UM. However, a couple of
Speaker 1: years ago, I was UM the unit chair for San Diego.
Speaker 1: So I was actually on the bargaining team previously. UM.
Speaker 1: And that was at the beginning of the pandemic UM.
Speaker 1: And so a lot of like COVID bargaining, for example, UM,
Speaker 1: I sort of like oversaw that and prior to that,
Speaker 1: I UM was organizer with the Cola movement and so
Speaker 1: I helped organize the wildcat strike. UM great San Diego. Yeah, nice, Yeah, Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's a long history of union organizing. It's good. And
Speaker 1: so can you explain to folks a little bit about
Speaker 1: because you mentioned the bargaining team there, right, and maybe
Speaker 1: people wouldn't be familiar with the distinctions in union organization.
Speaker 1: Obviously this is in Italy in the nineteen sixties, so
Speaker 1: you don't bargain with the entire union on mass e sadly,
Speaker 1: but they do. The university meets with a certain group
Speaker 1: of union representatives, So can you explain like who they
Speaker 1: are and how they're selected to start with? Maybe? Yeah, absolutely, UM.
Speaker 1: So there are essentially two levels of three level of
Speaker 1: leadership UM within the union. So at the top, in
Speaker 1: terms of statewide leadership, you have the Executive Board UM
Speaker 1: and that's you know, like president, vice presidents for North
Speaker 1: and South campuses UM, trustees, treasurers, things like that UM.
Speaker 1: And then you have campus based leadership and that's split
Speaker 1: between head stewards that are apportioned to campuses based on
Speaker 1: their population in size UM. And then you have to
Speaker 1: kind of sort of like head leadership positions, one being
Speaker 1: the unit chair and the other being the recording secretary.
Speaker 1: And so the bargaining team for the whole union is
Speaker 1: composed of the unit chair and the sec from each
Speaker 1: campus UM. And at this time around, we've added someone
Speaker 1: from you see, San Francisco. They're usually not represented, like
Speaker 1: in the past bargaining cycles they haven't been, So there
Speaker 1: are now nineteen people on UM, the u W two
Speaker 1: eight six five bargaining Team UM, whereas previously there had
Speaker 1: been a team UM. Yeah, and I guess that's sort
Speaker 1: of like final level of of leadership that combines both
Speaker 1: campus level and statewide leadership is what's called the Joint
Speaker 1: Council UM. But that's kind of the hierarchy of the
Speaker 1: structure of the union. Okay, yeah, it's fascinating they just
Speaker 1: went to an odd number because I want to get
Speaker 1: onto some think next, which is this division like there's
Speaker 1: that I think people are calling them BT ten and
Speaker 1: BT nine, right, yeah, which which could a bit b
Speaker 1: T nine a b T nine if you if you
Speaker 1: didn't have the the UCSF person, which would have been
Speaker 1: a whole larger sort of mess. M Yeah, Yeah, that
Speaker 1: would have been great. So what is this division? Like
Speaker 1: there there are two distinct I guess positions as as
Speaker 1: regards bargaining, so preaus you could explain a little bit
Speaker 1: of that. Yeah, absolutely, UM, I mean I think just
Speaker 1: you know, this might be obvious, but just a preface
Speaker 1: with the fact that UM, even within these so called
Speaker 1: camps of like b T ten, b T nine, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of heterogeneity, right, And so we saw this
Speaker 1: voting block emerge in the first week of the strike
Speaker 1: mainly around UM the wages demand and how UM you know,
Speaker 1: one of the central pieces of that original demand, the
Speaker 1: way that it was crafted was that it was aimed
Speaker 1: at bringing members out of rent burden and so Rent Burton,
Speaker 1: I'm sure folks have talked about this before, but it's
Speaker 1: defined as paying more than of your monthly income in rent.
Speaker 1: And so that translated in terms of our demand to
Speaker 1: a minimum base wage of dollars a year, along with
Speaker 1: wage increases that are attacked onto UM, the increase in
Speaker 1: like the median rental price UM for for housing and
Speaker 1: so uh. In that vote, we saw you know, the
Speaker 1: split emerge ten nine, and then we saw UM again,
Speaker 1: this kind of split paralleled in the vote to have
Speaker 1: open or closed bartning sessions and the fact that ten
Speaker 1: people voted to have closed sessions. And again, you know,
Speaker 1: since then, another big concession I'm gonna is the term concession,
Speaker 1: even though there's a lot of consternation coming from like
Speaker 1: u AW leadership, because concession is technically when you lose
Speaker 1: something you've already had, you already have. And so when
Speaker 1: it comes to like the disability and Access article, UM,
Speaker 1: you know, something that we proposed and which you demand,
Speaker 1: that was crafted through and by uh, you know, disability
Speaker 1: just as activists and disabled workers was mandatory supervisor training
Speaker 1: and that was dropped UM. And again we saw that
Speaker 1: along the same lines of ten and nine UM. And
Speaker 1: so you know, I think ideologically speaking, if I were
Speaker 1: to kind of you know, analyze this and give my
Speaker 1: my take, it's that the nine people I think are
Speaker 1: more committed to UM I suppose being like representative of uh,
Speaker 1: their campus concerns. UM. And so, for example, some of
Speaker 1: those b T nine members I was on the bargaining
Speaker 1: team with a few years ago, and you know, they
Speaker 1: and I didn't necessarily agree on a lot of issues UM.
Speaker 1: But now because their campuses have been vocally in support
Speaker 1: of demands like a cost of living adjustment of COLA
Speaker 1: or in support of UM, you know, not dropping the
Speaker 1: amount of child care that we can get folks reimbursed for. UM.
Speaker 1: You know, actually listening to their membership has caused them
Speaker 1: to kind of quinde quote side with UM other bargaining
Speaker 1: team members which may have other ideological commitments beyond just
Speaker 1: the contract, right, and so commitment to progressively defunding you
Speaker 1: see p D right the police department and sort of
Speaker 1: putting that those funds elsewhere within the university system. UM.
Speaker 1: And so yeah, I mean I think, you know, we
Speaker 1: see that kind of split and emerge UM, you know
Speaker 1: now with this bargaining cycle. But this is also split
Speaker 1: that's existed within the union for a while. And so
Speaker 1: you look historically at the contracts cycle, right, UM two
Speaker 1: times thousand eleven, and there's always been this kind of division,
Speaker 1: and it's red. It's represented in American labor more broadly
Speaker 1: between kind of like socio political unionism on one end
Speaker 1: and we're like liberal or business unionism on the other.
Speaker 1: And so it's not really at least it shouldn't be
Speaker 1: surprising to us that a lot of those BT ten
Speaker 1: members or a majority of folks on the statewide executive
Speaker 1: board are aligned with what's called like the administrative Caucus
Speaker 1: at the u a W international level, or they're vocally
Speaker 1: supportive of current UW President Ray Curry. And in the
Speaker 1: latest general elections UM, even though officially the local didn't
Speaker 1: take a stance UM. On social media there's photos of
Speaker 1: our union president posing with Ray Curry UM for the
Speaker 1: Curry Solidarity Team UM. And so there are those kind
Speaker 1: of like larger structural alignments as well. Yeah, and of
Speaker 1: course it give people underway and even yeah, but like
Speaker 1: you said, within the union as a whole, like yeah,
Speaker 1: and within the whole like American unionization, right, we have
Speaker 1: the a f l c I O, which includes unions
Speaker 1: which are of police officers. And then we have I
Speaker 1: know that the UCSD locals of you only so you
Speaker 1: see locals I should say of u AW have made
Speaker 1: statements about that being an issue, but it's it's still
Speaker 1: a thing that's happening. And yeah, it doesn't necessarily and
Speaker 1: follow especially in this country, that labor organization is always
Speaker 1: progressive in its in its other politics, right, absolutely, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I thought it was really cool that a lot of
Speaker 1: the demands that were made were progressive when when the
Speaker 1: strike began, right like, there was a cops off campus demand,
Speaker 1: there was access needs demand and things like that, like
Speaker 1: access to child care for people. And some of them
Speaker 1: some of them were economics, some of them were not
Speaker 1: economics some of them which has always been a thing
Speaker 1: with student organizing. Right, we can go back and I'm
Speaker 1: not really good at masks. We can get back to
Speaker 1: and we can we can look at like students making
Speaker 1: political demands and that changing the demands that unions made
Speaker 1: in the nineties, And I think it's cool that that
Speaker 1: you will have those going in. Where are we at
Speaker 1: with the bargaining now? Like it it doesn't look like
Speaker 1: comes a leaving campus from what I can see right now, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think. Um So, it's kind of complicated right now
Speaker 1: because we've just recently entered voluntary pre impast mediation UM
Speaker 1: and so a lot of the big outstanding articles wages, childcare,
Speaker 1: the remission of UH nonresident supplemental tuition, which disproportionately affects
Speaker 1: international students, right makes some quota postre more costly to
Speaker 1: the university. UM So, a lot of those open things
Speaker 1: now are being discussed through this mediator UM. And I
Speaker 1: think even within that process, UM, we see a lot
Speaker 1: of the same issues emerging that have been present for
Speaker 1: the entirety of the bargaining processes, which mainly is that UM. Again,
Speaker 1: my position on this is that our bargaining team hasn't
Speaker 1: been pushing enough UM. And you see that kind of
Speaker 1: on two levels. One at the actual table, UM, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of passivity and so when you know the
Speaker 1: bargaining team is kind of explaining their decision to membership,
Speaker 1: it's mainly UM. You know, they're saying things like, well,
Speaker 1: we reduced the wages demand by eleven thousand dollars like
Speaker 1: right away, because that's what would be more amenable to
Speaker 1: the university. And of course that is not true, right
Speaker 1: because the u C came back to us with like
Speaker 1: a dollar offer or something like that, like PITIFULI low UM.
Speaker 1: And so again there's a lot of you know, concessionary
Speaker 1: I think moves UM, and there's the desire to to
Speaker 1: kind of close the gap with the university essentially, and
Speaker 1: again that kind of betrays UM. I think a fundamental
Speaker 1: misunderstanding from our bargaining team that some how, if we
Speaker 1: are respectable enough, if we present enough rational arguments that
Speaker 1: you see will respect that right, they'll they'll sort of
Speaker 1: like give in to our demands. UM. That will somehow
Speaker 1: goad them to come in our direction. Whereas you know,
Speaker 1: we should see that you see as like one of
Speaker 1: the largest bosses, one of the largest landlords in the country. UM.
Speaker 1: And so of course they're gonna try to scures us
Speaker 1: out of as much as they can, because that's their function. UM.
Speaker 1: And so on one end, I think we've seen a
Speaker 1: lot of core demands get dropped. We've seen um uh
Speaker 1: intense like weakening of our position, as well as the
Speaker 1: really incredible lack of transparency. UM. And so I mentioned
Speaker 1: before the fact that most bargaining meetings or most bargaining
Speaker 1: sessions have been closed doors. UM, the fact that a
Speaker 1: number of like private like sidebars have taken place, and
Speaker 1: oftentimes membership gets like very vague emails or were or
Speaker 1: we're you know told like oh, progress was made, you know,
Speaker 1: we want certain things, but then the technicality of those
Speaker 1: wins is completely left out of the picture. UM. Even
Speaker 1: more recently, bargaining team members voted to uh make the
Speaker 1: votes at the table private, and so after dropping the
Speaker 1: coal to demand. You know, folks were upset and obviously
Speaker 1: reaching out to the bargaining team, showing up to caucuses
Speaker 1: and being upset, and so from there, the bargaining team
Speaker 1: framed this as quote court harassment and essentially voted to
Speaker 1: make all the votes private UM. And so you know,
Speaker 1: we've seen a lot of moves like that that, you know,
Speaker 1: make it clear that the union leadership is trying to
Speaker 1: preserve the union rather than preserve its membership right in
Speaker 1: prisoner of the well being of those folks. And so
Speaker 1: I think at the table again we see this kind
Speaker 1: of passive or concessionaire UM strategy. And on the ground,
Speaker 1: when it comes to the strikes at all these campuses,
Speaker 1: we see something similar where you know, the majority of
Speaker 1: the action is that we took in the first two
Speaker 1: to three weeks of the strike was just picketing, right,
Speaker 1: And obviously, you know, the picket is a powerful tool.
Speaker 1: The picket is a very symbolic tool. But in a
Speaker 1: industry like the Academy, picketing doesn't serve the same purpose
Speaker 1: as it might like at a factory, right, we're not
Speaker 1: actually shutting down the workplace. It's a great show of
Speaker 1: force in a way because you have thousands of people out.
Speaker 1: But obviously, when we're being required to sign up for
Speaker 1: twenty hours of picketing to get our strike pay, folks
Speaker 1: get exhausted. We will have you know, like huge marches
Speaker 1: through campus, go to a rally and it will be
Speaker 1: two hours of people talking UM, and that exhaust people.
Speaker 1: And even when it comes to you know, like ec
Speaker 1: Davis they had the undergrads actually had like an amazing
Speaker 1: direct action where they blockaded the campus every single day. UM,
Speaker 1: and that of course led to a legal response from
Speaker 1: the university and the union leadership, you know, rather than
Speaker 1: challenge that or you know, take take measures to make
Speaker 1: sure that those could organize autonomously of them UM started uh,
Speaker 1: like harassing and discipline folks basically UM for taking taking
Speaker 1: part in solidarity actions that may push up against the law. UM.
Speaker 1: And so what we see as like a concessionary attitude
Speaker 1: at the table, I think is translated as a very
Speaker 1: or is translated into like respectability politics UM on the ground. UM. Yeah, yeah, No,
Speaker 1: I think that's an extent way of phrasing it. And
Speaker 1: that's that's sort of what what you're definitely suggesting and
Speaker 1: what it seems that we've seen. So when does that
Speaker 1: leave people? And I think some of the things that
Speaker 1: have been suggested to be like in in the sort
Speaker 1: of current proposals both from the Union the university would
Speaker 1: leave people with a contract that they would find I'm
Speaker 1: guessing unsatisfactory, right, especially after for four and a half
Speaker 1: five weeks of being out of and and possible withholding
Speaker 1: of pay right which we can get onto. But where
Speaker 1: does that leave people? Like? What what sort of feeling
Speaker 1: amongst your Obviously you can't speak for the rank of
Speaker 1: five across the whole university, but what was the sort
Speaker 1: of feeling amongst the rank and file with regards to
Speaker 1: what do we do if we get this offer which
Speaker 1: doesn't give us the things that we went out for
Speaker 1: in the first place. Yeah, Um, I think that there
Speaker 1: is a lot of just polarization around that question. Um.
Speaker 1: I've heard from a number of folks. Unsurprisingly. I think
Speaker 1: people who UM are material at least treated a little
Speaker 1: bit better. Right, we get higher pay already um from
Speaker 1: the university being all right with it, you know. But
Speaker 1: that's that's the most that I hear. I haven't heard anyone,
Speaker 1: even the most staunch supporter of the union establishment say
Speaker 1: that this contractor at least what is bound to come
Speaker 1: to the table at this point is going to be satisfactory,
Speaker 1: is going to actually be desirable. It's just seen as like, oh,
Speaker 1: this is the best we can get, and we might
Speaker 1: as well settle in like every sense of the word. UM.
Speaker 1: But that being said, there is a large contingent again
Speaker 1: of folks that are totally fine with that, or they're
Speaker 1: tired of striking, or they're seeing a lot of retaliation
Speaker 1: from their supervisors, and the union I think has failed
Speaker 1: to um not only respond to that retaliation and to
Speaker 1: like reensure and empower members, but it's also failed to
Speaker 1: you know, the technical term and organizing would be innoculate, right. UM.
Speaker 1: There is a huge, in my opinion, organizational failure to
Speaker 1: make clear exactly what could happen to folks when we
Speaker 1: go on strike, or to prepare us to hear the
Speaker 1: talking points from the university UM and how to you know,
Speaker 1: collectively organize against it, to build up a kind of
Speaker 1: consciousness to resist internalizing that and to say like, oh,
Speaker 1: I don't want to strike because my jobs at risk
Speaker 1: or something, and it's like yeah, of course, right, that's
Speaker 1: the point, you know, it's like where we're taking that
Speaker 1: action UM, and so on one end, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: there's a number of reasons to why, and the kind
Speaker 1: of hinted at that, but there is a large content
Speaker 1: of of people who UM would just be okay and
Speaker 1: they're going to vote yess UM. But I also think
Speaker 1: right and as I'm sure you know you've you've seen
Speaker 1: around social media or you've talked to other folks who
Speaker 1: are on this side of voting no UM. You know,
Speaker 1: I think a lot of the consternation there comes again
Speaker 1: from the fact that we've dropped so much UM and
Speaker 1: kind of have left our most vulnerable members out to
Speaker 1: drive UM. So whether that comes from you know, reducing
Speaker 1: the amount of childcare or dependent health care or UM
Speaker 1: you know again dropping those like really core elements of
Speaker 1: the disability and access needs UM articles. When it comes
Speaker 1: to dropping COLA and dropping our wages down to a
Speaker 1: point where we would still be in not just rent burden,
Speaker 1: but severe rent burden. UM, it's been leading a lot
Speaker 1: of folks to uh, you know, promote the idea that
Speaker 1: we're going to vote not UM regardless, because even if
Speaker 1: the remaining articles you know, are better than we expected UM,
Speaker 1: and they get tentatively agreed to. There's already too much
Speaker 1: that's been lost to make this UH an adequate contract, right,
Speaker 1: not even great, not even satisfactory, but just adequate. UM.
Speaker 1: And so you know, of course that kind of UH division,
Speaker 1: as you might say, UM, has brought up a lot
Speaker 1: of tensions, especially in the last few days. UM. But
Speaker 1: you know, I think now we're seeing a broader gap
Speaker 1: between these two like sides UM, where there are folks
Speaker 1: that are pretty much again set on voting yes because
Speaker 1: it's good enough UM, and there are other folks who
Speaker 1: are pretty staunching in voting now and trying to build
Speaker 1: up that movement UM. And I think the point we're
Speaker 1: at now, at least speaking from that like vote no side,
Speaker 1: is that UM, we really need to outline and be
Speaker 1: transparent with membership where we can go from there, like
Speaker 1: how do we demystify the process or the process the
Speaker 1: possibility of impasse UM. You know, that's been a concept
Speaker 1: that's around a lot by union leadership, and it's never
Speaker 1: fully unpacked UM. And so it's like a fearmongering tool
Speaker 1: that's that's been in my opinion at least like used
Speaker 1: to subdue member militancy. Um, so that's one issue. Another
Speaker 1: issue is like how do we reopen certain articles, how
Speaker 1: do we build this quote unquote long haul strike to
Speaker 1: gain more than we've already you know, um given up
Speaker 1: at this point. And so I think a lot of
Speaker 1: those technicalities that are up in the air are renewed,
Speaker 1: sort of like areas of organizing focus. Um. Yeah, so
Speaker 1: you don't have to abandon some of those demands which
Speaker 1: we're not economic link. Yeah, that can still be Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, I guess there's only point in really speculating
Speaker 1: how many people will vote yes or no. We'll see
Speaker 1: once we see the agreement. And yeah, but like can
Speaker 1: you give us an update then on where striking get
Speaker 1: some see progressively? How did it get longer? Right? People
Speaker 1: don't want to stand on a picket for five weeks,
Speaker 1: six weeks. They don't they want to go home in
Speaker 1: the holidays. Um. They have this pressure that's been leveraged,
Speaker 1: perhaps unfairly and sometimes like erroneously, that their students will
Speaker 1: face immigration or graduation consequences, which is largely untrue. So like,
Speaker 1: can you talk about there's there's a chance that people
Speaker 1: won't be getting paid right in December? Has that happened
Speaker 1: to anyone. What's the latest with that? UM. SO, A
Speaker 1: lot of what's been going around UM in terms of
Speaker 1: issues with pay. A lot of the news I've seen
Speaker 1: concerns post docs, so folks from the local who actually
Speaker 1: just signed an approse that tenant of agreement. UM. So
Speaker 1: the university has put out some language implying that they'll
Speaker 1: retroactively doc paid UM and so. UM. Yeah, I can't
Speaker 1: like speak to the technicalities of that, UM, but that's
Speaker 1: definitely a concern I've seen floating around UM. And I
Speaker 1: know that they're actively organizing around it. UM for a
Speaker 1: s c S and UH student researchers. UM, we none
Speaker 1: of us have been docked pay yet. UM. We all
Speaker 1: got paid for December. UM, in part because I just
Speaker 1: think the university has a really hard time keeping track
Speaker 1: of who's on strike. On top of the fact that,
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know if anyone's already complained to
Speaker 1: you about you see path, but the parallel system that
Speaker 1: got rolled out yeah a few years ago. UM, it's terrible.
Speaker 1: It's an absolutely fucking nightmare. Yeah. UM, and so I
Speaker 1: think it would be a massive achievement for them to
Speaker 1: even be able to withhold. Folks pay through that system. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the struggled to pay people in the past, including myself.
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, um yeah absolutely, and so um, you know,
Speaker 1: I think it is it is a real concern. But
Speaker 1: at this point, um, at least to my knowledge, no
Speaker 1: one in or s r U has been affected by
Speaker 1: by pay with holding. And then let's talk about the
Speaker 1: grade withholding, which is now that today is today right?
Speaker 1: That the grades should we do in Obviously many people
Speaker 1: are not filing those grades and which again it's another
Speaker 1: example of the UC just being a bureaucratic disaster, but
Speaker 1: we can skip past that. So the grades are not
Speaker 1: being being filed. Can we talk about some of the
Speaker 1: suggestions that have been made by the university. I know
Speaker 1: one of them was that students on like F one
Speaker 1: visas might face consequences. That's not true, as best having
Speaker 1: been on that form visas, best to understand it, and
Speaker 1: that students on on a grant and scholarships might face consequences.
Speaker 1: Can you explain sort of what they've said, and then
Speaker 1: perhaps PREPS office some insight into too, why you think
Speaker 1: that that might be misleading? Yeah? Absolutely, Um, so exactly
Speaker 1: what you're saying. Um, you know, folks and vulnerable categories
Speaker 1: such as people on academic probation or whose financial aid
Speaker 1: is dependent on being in like you know, good standing
Speaker 1: UM or yeah, like international students. UM. Yeah. There's been
Speaker 1: a lot of uh fairmongering and misleading information out there
Speaker 1: that these students might be you know, kicked out of school,
Speaker 1: they might be reported, they might um face uh you
Speaker 1: know again like financial consequences. UM. But it's important also
Speaker 1: to recognize that, uh, having a grade remain blank, it
Speaker 1: doesn't affect folks g p A. It doesn't have folks
Speaker 1: affect folks academic standing. UM. And for international students, UM.
Speaker 1: You know the best that we understand, and we've actually
Speaker 1: communicated with universities international students offices, and what they say
Speaker 1: is that, um, it's enrollment that matters, not necessarily having
Speaker 1: the grade. And so UM, even if you know, let's
Speaker 1: say like all of someone's grades are withheld, they've still
Speaker 1: enrolled in the requisite number of credits UM, and so
Speaker 1: that that standing in terms of a visa wouldn't be affected. UM.
Speaker 1: And the same goes for even something as simple as
Speaker 1: moving onto the next course in a sequence. UM, because uh,
Speaker 1: you know, again, the withholding of a grade doesn't affect
Speaker 1: UM that kind of like progress or academic standard. UM.
Speaker 1: And as a technical note, a lot of folks are
Speaker 1: again I'm concerned that like, well, wouldn't this blank grade
Speaker 1: lead to an incomplete or wouldn't it lead to an
Speaker 1: F UM And in terms of the incomplete, there's a
Speaker 1: reason why we're not filing everyone with an eye. We're
Speaker 1: leaving the grades blink because an incomplete is costly, it's
Speaker 1: more work for everyone, and so we're avoiding that. And UM,
Speaker 1: blank grades don't default to an F until the following
Speaker 1: semester or following term ends. And so for us at
Speaker 1: UCSD UM, since many of us are withholding grades, they
Speaker 1: those blank grades wouldn't turn into an F until the
Speaker 1: end of winter, so around March. And I don't think
Speaker 1: anyone expects to strike to go that one. Yeah, it
Speaker 1: would be truly historic. And yes, so how has he
Speaker 1: had to at your response being then yeah, that's UM,
Speaker 1: it's difficult because I know at certain campuses, like I
Speaker 1: mentioned you see Davis earlier, there's been huge undergrad involvement there. UM.
Speaker 1: At San Diego, I think the response has been a
Speaker 1: bit mixed. UM. I know many of my students. For example,
Speaker 1: we're supportive of the strike UM, and within you know,
Speaker 1: my department Ethnic Studies, we did try to get students
Speaker 1: more involved, Like we held teachings UM to get students
Speaker 1: to come out. And you know, the class that I'm
Speaker 1: teeing for right now is called Land and Labor, and
Speaker 1: so we talked about you know, U C s D
Speaker 1: right and the relationship to like colonialism, capitalism, landed labor UM.
Speaker 1: And so we've tried to integrate you know, not just UM,
Speaker 1: you know, student and engagement and support, but also to
Speaker 1: use this as another form of study, right, as a
Speaker 1: form of study that's not that's outside the kind of
Speaker 1: like bureacratic mess that is the university with its nonsense UM.
Speaker 1: I think what's difficult at San Diego is that, UM,
Speaker 1: you know, political engagement has historically come in waves. Obviously
Speaker 1: at all universities. Folks come and go, but it's particularly acute,
Speaker 1: I think at San Diego where there's massive moments of
Speaker 1: like upheaval and like folks coming out in the thousands,
Speaker 1: like we saw back in UM around the pandemic, around
Speaker 1: the uprisings UM during the summer, around even the Cola
Speaker 1: movement right, which was a little bit before that. We
Speaker 1: saw huge numbers of undergrads come out, in part because
Speaker 1: we were able back then at least to connect our
Speaker 1: demands to their concerns. Right. The fact that psychological services
Speaker 1: on campus are horribly underfunded, Right, people have to wait
Speaker 1: a whole quarter to get even the intake of planet um.
Speaker 1: The fact that again, like they're getting screwed over with
Speaker 1: housing just as much as we are UM paying you know,
Speaker 1: over ten or fifteen thousand dollars a year in it
Speaker 1: for a dorm um. And so you know, that connection
Speaker 1: back then, I think, really drew out the undergrads, and
Speaker 1: that's what's really lacking now. Again, I think because of
Speaker 1: the way that the union has framed the struggle quite
Speaker 1: narrowly as not just what affects workers, but what what
Speaker 1: affects the majority of workers UM, that's left out a
Speaker 1: lot of the broader concerns. That has foreclosed a lot
Speaker 1: of broader critiques of the university. And so when it
Speaker 1: comes to something like the cops off campus demand, the
Speaker 1: fact that we have bargain team members at u c
Speaker 1: l A for example, literally lie and say that it's
Speaker 1: never been on the table. UM it's really indicative of
Speaker 1: how the union is trying to frame this. And so
Speaker 1: the fact that you know, again those broader conversations around
Speaker 1: the UC being a landlord around the UM one way
Speaker 1: that you know, profit and resources are um inequitably distributed
Speaker 1: through the university infrastructure, right, those things drop out of
Speaker 1: the conversation about our strike UM and if we do
Speaker 1: bring it up, we're seen as dissidents or something like that,
Speaker 1: or radical UM. And so the fact that those things
Speaker 1: have dropped out, I think has led to us seeing
Speaker 1: the situation like we see at UCSD where the undergrads
Speaker 1: are almost ambivalent, if not hostile, because we haven't done
Speaker 1: a good enough job engaging them. We haven't also organized
Speaker 1: alongside and with them UM. Rather it's been like come
Speaker 1: support your t A S and not like we're fighting together, right,
Speaker 1: And so it's yeah, it betrayed. It gives the impression
Speaker 1: that this is like a very one way UM or
Speaker 1: you know, like an interdirectional form of support, where in reality,
Speaker 1: you know, we should be building up those ties of
Speaker 1: solidarity and that you know, we should be focusing not
Speaker 1: just on winning a contract, but then building and sustaining
Speaker 1: this movement against the university in a much larger or
Speaker 1: broader sense. Yeah, because it's speaking from experience. I know
Speaker 1: a lot of those undergrads feel very disempowered in their
Speaker 1: relations with the university and and some of the demands,
Speaker 1: like the access needs demand, you know, the demand for
Speaker 1: improved student counseling and psychological services, things like that that
Speaker 1: would benefit directly everyone on campus. And then it's a
Speaker 1: shame not to see that. It's a shame to see
Speaker 1: that sort of left to the side when I think
Speaker 1: it could build a more effective movement. So, yeah, it
Speaker 1: does seem to go, like you said, campus by campus department.
Speaker 1: Your your department like has historically been a lot more
Speaker 1: engaged than others. I think it's fair to say so.
Speaker 1: And so we've reached the Christmas break now great have
Speaker 1: been withheld. I think a lot of people thought was
Speaker 1: like sort of a nuclear option or like a step up,
Speaker 1: which he doesn't seem to have been, Like, it really
Speaker 1: hasn't done anything, and the UC has entered into the
Speaker 1: university and the union have entered into a voluntary pre
Speaker 1: impassed mediation. When do you, like, if you were just speculating,
Speaker 1: and when do you think we'll see like a resolution
Speaker 1: because it's already slipped out of coverage, right, like if
Speaker 1: I look at our local newspaper, that they've stopped reporting
Speaker 1: on it, which doesn't help absolutely. Yeah, um, I think
Speaker 1: you know, it's it's difficult to speculate in part because
Speaker 1: as we've seen with past bargaining updates, they tend to
Speaker 1: drop bombshells on us, um, Like with the whole coal
Speaker 1: of demands being you know, severely cut down. We found
Speaker 1: about We found out about that like two hours before
Speaker 1: the bargaining ste which is aut like ten pm. And
Speaker 1: so it's totally possible by like that by the end
Speaker 1: of this week we'll have a tentative agreement, like you know,
Speaker 1: folks have been speculating on that. It wouldn't surprise me.
Speaker 1: I would be disappointed, but I wouldn't be surprised. Um.
Speaker 1: At the same time, though, I I do think that
Speaker 1: we've been able to build up sufficient pressure on the
Speaker 1: union establishment or the leadership um that I think there
Speaker 1: it might be a bit more asitant right to take
Speaker 1: that sudden of a move or to kind of come
Speaker 1: out of left field or something like that. Um. And
Speaker 1: so you know, there is a distinct possibility, especially with
Speaker 1: the holidays coming up, that this might go into the
Speaker 1: new year. UM, and obviously that would be like my
Speaker 1: hope to go as long as possible, yea, UM. But yeah,
Speaker 1: I think it's it's incredibly tough, and I think that's
Speaker 1: causing a lot of anxiety UM. And that's kind of
Speaker 1: a disorganizing energy, right to not know when something like
Speaker 1: this might happen, because there is such an utter lack
Speaker 1: of communication or um, you know, democratic input UM. And
Speaker 1: I think in terms of you know, the the coverage
Speaker 1: or the great strike, UM, what's really unfortunate, I think
Speaker 1: is the way that I've heard, you know, from the
Speaker 1: horse's mouth, right certain barning team members saying that withholding
Speaker 1: grades isn't an important form or isn't an impactful form
Speaker 1: of of labor withholding because the university doesn't care. And
Speaker 1: historically we've seen that they really do care, and within
Speaker 1: academic strikes, with holding finals is a massive thing, right.
Speaker 1: And I think that in order to really um realized
Speaker 1: the impact that will have on the institution, we have
Speaker 1: to go for a few more weeks into the winter
Speaker 1: quarter um. And you know, right now even to try
Speaker 1: to um build up some more UM. I guess, like
Speaker 1: you know, pr around great withholding UM. There are folks
Speaker 1: doing research and trying to calculate like quantify um what
Speaker 1: like you know, each credit would mean in like real dollars.
Speaker 1: And then the fact that you know, hundreds of students
Speaker 1: grades are being withheld for a three or four hour
Speaker 1: like three or four credit UM class and what that
Speaker 1: translates to into money UM And so yeah, yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean if we look at what the university does, right,
Speaker 1: it turns its capital into into into income essentially through
Speaker 1: like leveraging its credibility for credential and charging people masses
Speaker 1: of rent for living there increasingly. And you can't take
Speaker 1: away the housing, right, which is it's made you so
Speaker 1: surviving you but you can't take away this this this product.
Speaker 1: Yeah and and and there have been um you know,
Speaker 1: there are a number of petitions out there, for example,
Speaker 1: um UH for undergrads to request like a reimbursement of
Speaker 1: their tuition for any classes that haven't been held or
Speaker 1: grades that have been withheld UM. And I think that's
Speaker 1: a really fantastic way to engage them and to put
Speaker 1: pressure on the university. There's also been UM attempts or
Speaker 1: at least you know, um, some strategizing on on our
Speaker 1: end on how to uh have the grade strike impact
Speaker 1: the university's accreditation um, And so we are trying to
Speaker 1: look for avenues to increase the pressure from this kind
Speaker 1: of like strategic move Yeah that's smart. Yeah, yeah, it
Speaker 1: must be difficult. I'm sure, Like is you develop relationships
Speaker 1: with undergraduate and especially when you're teaing in your department
Speaker 1: of class you care about eight it's a shame to
Speaker 1: to lose that opportunity to talk to people about important
Speaker 1: things like landed labor. And so I'm sure it's difficult
Speaker 1: to not have that chance to even check in at
Speaker 1: the end of the end of the term and just say, like,
Speaker 1: you know, this has been fun. What have we learned? Yeah? Absolutely, um,
Speaker 1: And I think you know, for a lot of us
Speaker 1: who are a s c S, you know, we're doing
Speaker 1: this not just for ourselves but for our students, right
Speaker 1: because we care about education. We recognize that the university
Speaker 1: as an institution is actually corrosive right to a quality education.
Speaker 1: And so absolutely, I think like there is a sense
Speaker 1: of loss. I think the fact that I can't, like
Speaker 1: you're saying, close out my class, the fact that I
Speaker 1: can't um, you know, really invest in my students the
Speaker 1: way I want and not trying to blame that on
Speaker 1: the strike, but trying to blame that on the conditions
Speaker 1: that have brought us to strike in the first police right, Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't want to get like full Marxists on main
Speaker 1: but like, yeah, the further alien a ted you are
Speaker 1: from your labor, then the the less that the experience
Speaker 1: is for your undergraduate and and that is definitely a
Speaker 1: thing that happens at the university. You become more and
Speaker 1: more inlalienated and oh yes, yes, the joy dies ye
Speaker 1: I say, with the PhD in doing the work in
Speaker 1: academia and Mohammed, is there anything else people should know
Speaker 1: about the strike like that we haven't talked about mm
Speaker 1: hmm see Um I I would say, you know, one
Speaker 1: one important thing is that both for folks within the
Speaker 1: university system and from you know, the outside, is to
Speaker 1: kind of place this strike in historic context. Um. I
Speaker 1: think when the union leadership has spoken about this at all,
Speaker 1: it's mainly around the size of the strike, the fact
Speaker 1: that it's it's historic because we have you know, forty
Speaker 1: eight thousand possible strikers from throughout the u c S.
Speaker 1: And that's kind of misleading because I think the real
Speaker 1: kind of like historic potential within the struggle is UM.
Speaker 1: For example, establishing a precedent of what a researcher strike
Speaker 1: looks like. Part of the reason it's so difficult for
Speaker 1: us to not only you know, mobilize researchers, but also
Speaker 1: you know, UM push back at against retaliation is because
Speaker 1: there is no set structure for what that kind of
Speaker 1: strip looks like, right, UM, there is no effective way
Speaker 1: that we have to UM counter the possible impacts on
Speaker 1: these people's futures UM. And so I think that you know,
Speaker 1: really emphasizing that to folks is UM is key. Another
Speaker 1: thing is UM the cola demand. Right the fact that
Speaker 1: we are trying to or at least we've tried to
Speaker 1: tack UM our wage increases not just to UM inflation
Speaker 1: or the consumer price index, but to the median increase
Speaker 1: in rental prices UM. That would be huge. And that's
Speaker 1: not just big for us as as workers within this
Speaker 1: local but that does set the precedent for all workers
Speaker 1: in the US. And I think that you know, we
Speaker 1: really by we, I mean like the union as a
Speaker 1: whole apparatus has not stressed the importance of that or
Speaker 1: the kind of like monumental shift that I could um
Speaker 1: kind of provoke in the landscape of American labor broadly,
Speaker 1: just so if people aren't aware, like, like, rent in
Speaker 1: California has gone up a way more than double, almost
Speaker 1: almost triple the rate of inflation and working people people
Speaker 1: who are members of unions by a large tend to
Speaker 1: be people who don't own property, but they tend to
Speaker 1: be people who rent property, right, And I can see
Speaker 1: by your your unfinished concrete ceiling that you're you're renting
Speaker 1: from the UC, which is the biggest landlord in California.
Speaker 1: So like you're right that this is a very historic thing.
Speaker 1: Is that rent increase for Cola. Is that tried to
Speaker 1: median rent in the state or is it median rent
Speaker 1: across you see rented like like apartments. So I think
Speaker 1: the actual language so this is part of the problem
Speaker 1: is that because it was dropped so quickly at the table,
Speaker 1: we weren't even even able to get into the vicissitudes
Speaker 1: of the demand itself. UM And so from my understanding,
Speaker 1: the increase would be based on um the like least
Speaker 1: affordable or essentially the largest increase that will see at
Speaker 1: any of the campuses, and everyone's wage would be increased
Speaker 1: to that when we look at the base wage k
Speaker 1: UM that was tacked onto again a kind of like
Speaker 1: median income or a median rental price throughout the state
Speaker 1: as well. And so actually fifty four k would be
Speaker 1: exactly enough to get me out of rent Burton. So
Speaker 1: anything less than that would actually still keep me in
Speaker 1: rent bourdon Um. And so yeah, that's kind of how Yeah,
Speaker 1: which rent bedon is is far too normal to think,
Speaker 1: especially in California. Yeah. Yeah, and the connective bargaining is
Speaker 1: tenants as well as workers is fascinating, right, Like it's
Speaker 1: something we've seen, but not in a large scale like
Speaker 1: and and like you on rent strike yet but yes,
Speaker 1: and as as a side note, yeah, um, we did
Speaker 1: have a couple of rent strikes in UH within ThEC
Speaker 1: system in the past few years at Berkeley at u
Speaker 1: C l A and here UM. And so I was
Speaker 1: actually part of organizing UM in the aftermath of COLA.
Speaker 1: At the beginning of the pandemic. UM I helped organize
Speaker 1: the first rent strike UM within h D h U
Speaker 1: C S D grat House UM. And so we have
Speaker 1: we have also seen that. But that's another way that
Speaker 1: the union has kind of limited the scope of this movement.
Speaker 1: Because there's been so much focus on us as only
Speaker 1: workers and the bread and butter issues, we kind of
Speaker 1: lose sight of the way that withholding rent, as you're saying,
Speaker 1: is another way of like really getting at the heart
Speaker 1: of the u c S profit engine. Yeah, yeah, and yes,
Speaker 1: it is a shame that these like Yeah, if you
Speaker 1: want to think the historical perspective, of course, like a Paris,
Speaker 1: it's like the monolith of student political organizing, I guess,
Speaker 1: and student political organizing changeing beast apply structures of the left,
Speaker 1: which which is it's some of what you had demanded
Speaker 1: was very similar to that in a sense, and that
Speaker 1: it was societal and political as much as it wasn't economic, right,
Speaker 1: and American unions tend to phrase themselves in terms of
Speaker 1: respectable liberal politics, not that. So it's a shame to
Speaker 1: see that. Go. I guess absolutely, and I think you know,
Speaker 1: this actually came up in a in a meeting um,
Speaker 1: which kind of astounded me, but again didn't on one
Speaker 1: hand astounded me, another hand was completely sort of to
Speaker 1: be expected, which is someone saying we need to make
Speaker 1: this movement UM as accessible as possible to workers without
Speaker 1: an activist bone in their body. UM. And so again
Speaker 1: there's always that appeal to the right, always the appeal
Speaker 1: to the most conservative reactionary force, and always at the
Speaker 1: expense right of the folks who are the most vulnerable,
Speaker 1: always at the expense of expanding this movement. And so
Speaker 1: as you're saying something that is more socio and socially
Speaker 1: and politically engaged. Yeah, I think most people come activist
Speaker 1: when they have to live in their car because they
Speaker 1: can't afford to live in the UC housing when they
Speaker 1: work at the EUC. But that is not everyone, of course.
Speaker 1: And all right Mohammed, where can people find you? Do
Speaker 1: you have social media? Do you, as I said, you
Speaker 1: want to share with you prefer to share like your
Speaker 1: unions or um something else I guess on on Twitter? Um,
Speaker 1: I am at a Slamo Marxist UM and so yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: so folks can find me there. UM. Otherwise, I mean,
Speaker 1: if there are folks within the u se um that
Speaker 1: are organizing UM, within any of the like vote no channels,
Speaker 1: I'm sure folks could find their way to meet UM. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I think just in general like following the Rank and
Speaker 1: File and COLA associated accounts on on social media. Trying
Speaker 1: to attend as many meanings as possible is is really
Speaker 1: how I think folks can get more in tune with
Speaker 1: with the struggle. Yeah, that's great. Thank you so much
Speaker 1: for your time. I appreciate it. Yeah, best of luck
Speaker 1: with everything. Thanks so much. So. I'm joined today by
Speaker 1: Megan Lynch, who's the founder of and a volunteer for
Speaker 1: U See Access Now, which has been one of the
Speaker 1: important bodies lobbying for increased access needs for people with
Speaker 1: disabilities at that you see as part of this strike.
Speaker 1: Hi Megan, how are you doing. Hi? I'm doing well.
Speaker 1: How about Thanks for having me great, Thanks Faith, Thanks
Speaker 1: for coming on. Megan. Can you explain and maybe explain
Speaker 1: a little bit about you see Access Now first and
Speaker 1: then we can get into sort of what the issues
Speaker 1: were and what the demands were. Well, let me start
Speaker 1: with clarifying what access needs are. Generally, I wouldn't want
Speaker 1: to I want to. I wouldn't want to have more
Speaker 1: access needs because it would mean that I need more
Speaker 1: things that I need to negotiate getting them met. So
Speaker 1: an access need is, uh, I have some thing that
Speaker 1: I need somebody to to you know, the inaccessible environment
Speaker 1: that we have often it's it's sort of default inaccessibility,
Speaker 1: and so having an access needs means that you know,
Speaker 1: I need to work out how to be in that environment.
Speaker 1: And sometimes you can even be in a really well
Speaker 1: accessible environment, and uh, it would be hard for people
Speaker 1: to meet your access needed without again trying to come
Speaker 1: to some kind of agreement. So there's a difference between
Speaker 1: accessibility and access needs. And I just wanted to clarify that.
Speaker 1: I thank you. I think that's very important. And so
Speaker 1: can you explain then what what sort of issues people
Speaker 1: were running into before the strike, like what what sort
Speaker 1: of things where they're that limited people's access to university
Speaker 1: spaces or education or work. Well, still very much going on,
Speaker 1: and in fact it's actually increased during the pandemic. Um
Speaker 1: the only time where things got a little better for
Speaker 1: some of us was, uh, you know in March when
Speaker 1: everybody you know, and this is what often happens, is
Speaker 1: that something when suddenly people who don't identify as disabled
Speaker 1: needs something, and there's enough of that, then there's there's
Speaker 1: no problem. Nobody has to submit medical documentation, nobody has
Speaker 1: to get special permission. It's really not a big rigmarole, right,
Speaker 1: but uh, when you identify as disabled and you say
Speaker 1: I have this as an access need, then suddenly, you know,
Speaker 1: you get you get the Spanish inquisition in terms of
Speaker 1: whether you you you deserve this thing that your tax
Speaker 1: dollars have been paying for at your institution anyway. So, um,
Speaker 1: it really runs the gamut for you know. I guess
Speaker 1: what I could best talk about is my own situation
Speaker 1: and uh what led to the formation of e C
Speaker 1: Access Now. So, um, I arrived here before the start
Speaker 1: of fall as a fifty year old disabled grad students.
Speaker 1: So I'm already in a kind of unusual position by
Speaker 1: being fifty or four years old here than disabled on
Speaker 1: top of it, And uh, I was set to t
Speaker 1: a my first quarter here. And I could spot even
Speaker 1: before the quarters started that the kinds of cycle recks
Speaker 1: they have here at UC Davis, which is, you know,
Speaker 1: usually lauded for being quote unquote bike friendly, Uh, we're
Speaker 1: not accessible to me, and that they would eventually you know,
Speaker 1: I could do it once or twice without hurting myself,
Speaker 1: but over time I was gonna be hurt and that
Speaker 1: would get in the way of me being able to
Speaker 1: do my duties as a t a not to mention
Speaker 1: anything I need to do for myself, because I was writing,
Speaker 1: like a lot of disabled cyclists, I don't ride the
Speaker 1: standard upright bicycle. I ride a recumbent bicycle with underseat steering,
Speaker 1: and the recks are not usually a big deal. Places
Speaker 1: I've lived in a number of different cities in California, Berkeley,
Speaker 1: Los Angeles see a lot of places have what are
Speaker 1: you know you racks? You know it, which is similar
Speaker 1: kind of is Sheffield rack for foes folks who know those,
Speaker 1: except you know, not quite as big. So it's not
Speaker 1: like it's this special you know you don't go to
Speaker 1: a special adaptive store for this rack. It is a
Speaker 1: more accessible rack, and most cities are sensibly using them,
Speaker 1: but for here, because despite their bike friendly reputation, they
Speaker 1: actually want to prioritize space for cars. They have made
Speaker 1: these racks that are so close together and not supportive, etcetera,
Speaker 1: that the only part I could ever lock my bike
Speaker 1: too would be the ends, and that's what everybody else
Speaker 1: wants to take first um And it wouldn't even be
Speaker 1: easy to the ends because again, these are really very
Speaker 1: specifically they have wheel wells, and the relationship between the
Speaker 1: locker thing and the wheel well is exactly the space
Speaker 1: a part you would do if you had sort of
Speaker 1: a standard adult size upright bike. And honestly, they're not
Speaker 1: even good for people who ride those. So, for instance,
Speaker 1: if you go and you see Davis subreddit, you will
Speaker 1: see sometimes threads where people are bullying people who want
Speaker 1: to get a cruiser bike because they're like, those things
Speaker 1: take up too much room. No, it's not that they
Speaker 1: didn't take up too much room. It's that the racks
Speaker 1: are very poorly designed. There are things CIEs, but they
Speaker 1: are SUVs. Yeah. They rather they would rather bully somebody
Speaker 1: about their choice of bike than to say, hey, these
Speaker 1: are really what a waste of taxpayer money to get
Speaker 1: these these bike racks that not only don't work for
Speaker 1: a lot of disabled people, but don't even work for
Speaker 1: people who are riding cargo bikes or using a trailer
Speaker 1: or you know other things you would want to do.
Speaker 1: So so anyway, I went first to the Disabled Students
Speaker 1: Center here, which is you know, the rationing and policing
Speaker 1: agency for disabled people. And you know, it's amazing to
Speaker 1: me like this, these are the people and they would
Speaker 1: literally call themselves experts on disability and accessibility, and they
Speaker 1: said to me, gosh, it never occurred to us that
Speaker 1: that would need to be accessible. This is on a
Speaker 1: campus where they're trying to encourage you to leave your
Speaker 1: car at home at least some of us, right and uh,
Speaker 1: and it's also how you get to school and to work, right,
Speaker 1: So why wouldn't I need that to be accessible? And
Speaker 1: so they I asked for something as simple as can
Speaker 1: you sign a letter? They wouldn't do it, you know,
Speaker 1: can you said? They wouldn't. They wouldn't back me up
Speaker 1: at all. So then I go directly to the Transportation
Speaker 1: of Parking Services. They were like, it's not covered under
Speaker 1: a d A, which is not true, and you know,
Speaker 1: and then they were like the solution they wanted to
Speaker 1: pose with it. You know. Eventually, when I finally after months,
Speaker 1: got a meeting, they were like, well, give us your
Speaker 1: schedule of classes and will install one of these racks
Speaker 1: at each building you're at. As if my schedule isn't
Speaker 1: going to change each quarter, is that a better use
Speaker 1: of Yeah? Is that a better use of tax money?
Speaker 1: To send a crew around to like to to to
Speaker 1: Jackhamber Concrete at a different location for each quarter. According
Speaker 1: to each disabled cyclist class us changes just get the
Speaker 1: right rack. So that that's when I went to the union,
Speaker 1: and even in the Union at that time, you know,
Speaker 1: it was really clear it wasn't just with that issue.
Speaker 1: I had other issues, but this was definitely getting in
Speaker 1: the way of my work as a t a because
Speaker 1: it was hurting my hands very badly, and in fact
Speaker 1: I had fallen a couple of times and my bike
Speaker 1: had fallen on top of me, and like nobody helps you.
Speaker 1: You just sit there watching you like a turtle, trying
Speaker 1: to you don't get So there's things like that. There's
Speaker 1: things like um, even just the housing here in terms
Speaker 1: of for instance, if I had had the luck of
Speaker 1: having a romantic partner, if I'd had the wealth and
Speaker 1: the ability to choose to have children, I would have
Speaker 1: been able to get grad housing. But as a disabled
Speaker 1: person who has an access need to be close to campus,
Speaker 1: I was I had zero priority whatsoever, and so I
Speaker 1: very nearly ended up starting that quarter having to live
Speaker 1: out of my car because you know, and I would
Speaker 1: think it would be pretty clear that a fifty four
Speaker 1: year old disabled grad student might actually have, uh maybe
Speaker 1: have more have fewer options in housing than somebody who's
Speaker 1: in their twenties and isn't disabled. But but you know,
Speaker 1: and I'm not saying that parents don't need family housing
Speaker 1: or anything like that, but what I'm saying is very clearly,
Speaker 1: I think some disabled people do have strong access needs
Speaker 1: to have accessible housing near campus. And that's very much
Speaker 1: not something that they bothered themselves with here at UC Davis.
Speaker 1: So you know, there's other things in terms of online
Speaker 1: accessibility and other things, but that those are the things
Speaker 1: that that affected me that I think are worth mentioning
Speaker 1: simply because they they're both unusual things people don't tend
Speaker 1: to think of, right, yeah, yeah, And it is a
Speaker 1: very uh, it's a very difficult system to navigate. Like
Speaker 1: like you said, I think one of the things that's
Speaker 1: already stood out is this this demand for like documentation, freddy,
Speaker 1: any sort of accommodation that you might need that they
Speaker 1: can make it very hard to remember in um, I
Speaker 1: was teaching at UCSD and I shattered my pelvis, uh
Speaker 1: and like that made moving at all extremely difficult for me,
Speaker 1: and they wouldn't give me a parking pass, and like
Speaker 1: then then proceeded to offer me once the diabetes, which
Speaker 1: is a whole like like interesting, like it's sort of
Speaker 1: calculation of which one of those things will definitely stop
Speaker 1: you walking. So yeah, and it was extremely sort of humiliating,
Speaker 1: I guess from a personal perspective, and degrading and time
Speaker 1: consuming and unnecessary. And so what were the demands then?
Speaker 1: At the start of this strike, right, there was an
Speaker 1: access needs element to the demands being made by the union.
Speaker 1: So perhaps we can go through Maybe first we can
Speaker 1: go through how you went from uh like this bike
Speaker 1: rrect which didn't accommodate, but pretty pretty basic need right
Speaker 1: to transport yourself to campus? How do we get from
Speaker 1: there to the union having access needs to minds as
Speaker 1: part of the strike. So as far as you see
Speaker 1: access now, it's involvement with it. Um. We went on
Speaker 1: Twitter and Facebook and Instagram and published the demandifesto in
Speaker 1: July of so, uh, the months between you know, the fall,
Speaker 1: when I made you know, went through these processes and
Speaker 1: when I finally decided, Okay, nobody's doing anything about this
Speaker 1: and I don't see any other organizations, so let's you know,
Speaker 1: jump into this um. By July, Uh, you see access
Speaker 1: now was contacted by somebody who was an officer within
Speaker 1: u a W fift ten and that's the post Doc
Speaker 1: and and Academic Researcher Union, and they had seen our work,
Speaker 1: you know, via social media and whatnot, and said, you know,
Speaker 1: we're about to go into contract bargaining and we'd really
Speaker 1: like to talk about disability shoes. So we had a
Speaker 1: meeting with them, and we actually had we did a
Speaker 1: presentation also to them, uh for their social justice and
Speaker 1: in our series. But we also had a meeting with
Speaker 1: a number of people from fifty ten in terms of let's,
Speaker 1: you know, let's think creatively here. Let's let's be ambitious
Speaker 1: about what it is, you know, because the thing is
Speaker 1: is that a lot of what people tend to do,
Speaker 1: particularly particularly when they're not disabled, but even some disabled
Speaker 1: people can do this because internalized able is M is
Speaker 1: really hard to throw off. We're sort of you know,
Speaker 1: and this is true of other oppressions too. You know,
Speaker 1: we're all sort of used to this system that has
Speaker 1: this policing, austerity, etcetera. You know, we all get schooled
Speaker 1: into not hoping for much anymore because we're just so used,
Speaker 1: you know, in my life time I've lived through decades
Speaker 1: of this kind of regularite bologne, so so it takes
Speaker 1: a while to think big about these things. But that's
Speaker 1: what we were trying to do. And so we sort
Speaker 1: of brainstormed with them a several see access Now members
Speaker 1: and several fifty eight ten members in terms of the
Speaker 1: sorts of things that could be uh asking for And
Speaker 1: so if if there's time and you don't mind, I
Speaker 1: can give you a view of that because the other
Speaker 1: stuff is online. But this isn't. So again this is
Speaker 1: sort of just a spitballing document, but we were like,
Speaker 1: you know, all ads for post doc positions on all platforms,
Speaker 1: they have to be accessible. Now, some some of this
Speaker 1: and some of what we're talking about is stuff that
Speaker 1: you see is actually legally obligated to do and just
Speaker 1: has not been doing. Um that would be one of them.
Speaker 1: UM training. You know, most emergency access plans are not
Speaker 1: made with the input of disabled people, and they don't
Speaker 1: even mention us. So you know, there are considerations for
Speaker 1: accessibility for different types of disabilities, different people. Uh. We
Speaker 1: have several buildings on UC Davis campus here that have
Speaker 1: little placards right in the lobby. Let's say they say
Speaker 1: something like, if you depend on uh, visual alarm systems
Speaker 1: in an emergency, please let somebody else know you're in
Speaker 1: this building, blah blah blah. And it's like even the
Speaker 1: way that's phrased because you know, quote unquote abled people,
Speaker 1: are you dependent on a sound alarm system to get
Speaker 1: out in a fire. But they but they don't phrase it,
Speaker 1: you know, as dependence when it's for them, right, They
Speaker 1: only phrase it as dependence when it's for somebody who's
Speaker 1: death or hard of hearing. So we've got several buildings
Speaker 1: on campus where they know that it's not up, it's
Speaker 1: not up to even not even just a d A.
Speaker 1: But just like basic human decency, people will die in
Speaker 1: that building. Deaf and hard of hearing people will not
Speaker 1: know that there's a fire or another emergency alarm system
Speaker 1: going off because we couldn't be bothered to pony up
Speaker 1: for some lights. Um. So that that kind of thing.
Speaker 1: In terms of an emergency action plan, these things have
Speaker 1: to be done. There has to be training, not only
Speaker 1: for the supervisors but really for you see itself, because
Speaker 1: the whole system it's just you know, cram full of
Speaker 1: able is um. You know, online working is key to accessibility.
Speaker 1: So it has to be a regular option, not just
Speaker 1: something for the pandemic. It should have been the whole time,
Speaker 1: and it also shouldn't you know, be a big burst
Speaker 1: up to it. There are some and you know, they're
Speaker 1: like quite kind of things you would think of as
Speaker 1: smaller that we put in here simply because again we're
Speaker 1: trying to think creatively, which is you know, reimbursements for instance.
Speaker 1: I mean that's a general problem with grad students and whatnot.
Speaker 1: Is that the university, which has far more resources than
Speaker 1: we do, it's sort of you know, taking its time
Speaker 1: reimbursing us for things that we've had to get right.
Speaker 1: And so the debt is actually being heaped onto the
Speaker 1: people least able to support it. And when it comes
Speaker 1: to disabled people, that is going to be even more
Speaker 1: of a burden because most disabled people have a higher
Speaker 1: cost of living and often have a lower income to boot.
Speaker 1: So we put you know that in there, we put
Speaker 1: in reimbursed. It's for costs incurred working at home or
Speaker 1: or or you know, in other ways remotely for an employer.
Speaker 1: That's section to eight oh two of the California Labor Code.
Speaker 1: Um uh, you know, sick policy in terms of like
Speaker 1: commuter checks, which you know, or some other kind of
Speaker 1: thing for public transit. Make the child care spaces and
Speaker 1: lactation rooms are accessible because you know the union will
Speaker 1: like lobby for that right, but you need to be
Speaker 1: you need to be express about the idea that these
Speaker 1: things need to be accessible. Like people don't think of
Speaker 1: everything needed to be accessible, but really it does. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and that sends a very sort of condescending message about
Speaker 1: like what you know, different people with different diffabilities might
Speaker 1: or might not be doing at which obviously isn't great
Speaker 1: that the US doing that, And so like, I really
Speaker 1: I thought these demands were fascinating because it's not what
Speaker 1: we often talk about when we talk about strikes, Like
Speaker 1: we talk about strikes often purely in terms of economics,
Speaker 1: right like uh in in the US that can include
Speaker 1: things like non way to benefits right like healthcare. But
Speaker 1: it in sort of most instances we talk about strikeing
Speaker 1: bread and butter terms like they have gone out and
Speaker 1: they want this much money to come back. And I
Speaker 1: think that strikes have the potential to build much greater
Speaker 1: solidarity by doing things like this, by incorporating these I
Speaker 1: guess social justice demands is one way of phrasing it.
Speaker 1: The basic human decency to minds will be another way
Speaker 1: of saying it. And it really yeah, it really impressed
Speaker 1: me that that this this was part of the package
Speaker 1: of demands from the union. How have things gone? Are
Speaker 1: you comfortable talking about how things have gone since the
Speaker 1: strike began? Well, I certainly don't know everything backwards and forwards,
Speaker 1: because honestly, it would be hard for any one person
Speaker 1: to do it all. It's all extremely complex stuff in
Speaker 1: terms of not in terms of you know, things on
Speaker 1: the ground, but in terms of the language in contracts
Speaker 1: and the process and bargaining. Uh there's a difference between
Speaker 1: like things that are tradition traditional to do as opposed
Speaker 1: to things that are actually the law, and then of
Speaker 1: course the actual enforcement and law. So anyway, this has
Speaker 1: been going on for a whole year, and as you
Speaker 1: can imagine, like penetrating it as your average person, it
Speaker 1: can be very difficult. So I will certainly give you, you
Speaker 1: you know, my view of it as so far as
Speaker 1: I've seen it, but um, we do have uh. So
Speaker 1: so we helped with like sort of spitballing, and they
Speaker 1: took it from there and what they started out with
Speaker 1: was not as you know, ambitious as the spitball document. Um.
Speaker 1: I think it tends. I think that got replicated a
Speaker 1: lot throughout the unions, which is, you know, my advice
Speaker 1: as somebody from the outside, just thinking about negotiations in general. Okay,
Speaker 1: you know they're going to cut you down, right, so
Speaker 1: why would you be the one to cut you down?
Speaker 1: You know they're gonna do it, right, you think big
Speaker 1: let them cut you down. And and unfortunately there were
Speaker 1: the majority voices in the bargaining teams tended often to
Speaker 1: be at least where the access needs articles were concerned, um,
Speaker 1: tended to be kind of let us cut ourselves down. Uh.
Speaker 1: So the starting doc for ten, although you know it's
Speaker 1: still had things in it that were very like if
Speaker 1: we have the original version of ten instead of what
Speaker 1: actually the folks you know, voted on voted yes on recently, Uh,
Speaker 1: it would still be a revolutionary document in in US
Speaker 1: labor history. I think. You know, I don't I've never
Speaker 1: heard in the news of anything any uh more ambitious
Speaker 1: than that. But but definitely it was down from what
Speaker 1: we were starting with, which you know, um so. But
Speaker 1: I think what happened was that you know, fifty ten
Speaker 1: came out and they were trying to coordinate and learn
Speaker 1: from each other to different units. Right, So then folks
Speaker 1: on s R, you and U A W also UH
Speaker 1: worked on the access needs articles and and the access
Speaker 1: needs articles even in themselves was a change because the
Speaker 1: previous versions of these things were phrases reasonable, accommodations who,
Speaker 1: which is language that stems from the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Speaker 1: And even that phrase is something that is really outdated
Speaker 1: because it is the idea, the ideas who is deciding
Speaker 1: what's reasonable? Right, the person who has no lived experience
Speaker 1: of disability or this gigantic public institution that is funded
Speaker 1: including by disabled people's tuitions and fed fees and whatnot
Speaker 1: in taxes. But you know where's my money go? It
Speaker 1: goes into bill in an accessible university? Right, So why
Speaker 1: am I supposed to let you judge what is reasonable?
Speaker 1: I think it's incredibly unreasonable that you use my money
Speaker 1: to build a university that not is not only hard
Speaker 1: for me to be at, but it is actively hostile
Speaker 1: to my health. Um. And so you know, and just
Speaker 1: the word accommodations centers and codifies that inaccessibility as being
Speaker 1: the norm and anything you do different from it is
Speaker 1: like you being accommodating. We'll get that, get the hell
Speaker 1: out over here with that stuff. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it
Speaker 1: makes much more sense to phrase it in those ways.
Speaker 1: And like, yeah, it seems like it was, as you said,
Speaker 1: a very ambitious goal and one that not only those
Speaker 1: things got transferred, which is I mean that that can
Speaker 1: happen in strikes. But it's also like it's it's a
Speaker 1: non economic thing that the university could have given to
Speaker 1: you all that it wouldn't have had to have, you know,
Speaker 1: I mean, in the university has a lot of money,
Speaker 1: and it would it would be very possible for it
Speaker 1: to pay grad to its students the ways they asked
Speaker 1: for at the start and post grad post docs and
Speaker 1: could be paid the way to say asked for. Tierney
Speaker 1: wouldn't really had the university they could, they could, you know,
Speaker 1: there are a million ways they could fund that. But well,
Speaker 1: I think that gets to the crux of why they
Speaker 1: don't do this, because the thing is is that if
Speaker 1: if you really think about it this way, and it
Speaker 1: takes a little doing, because again we're sort of school
Speaker 1: dot to, but it is a form of misappropriation of
Speaker 1: public funds. If all of the public is funding this
Speaker 1: institution and we do that through our state and our
Speaker 1: federal taxes, we do and and then of course if
Speaker 1: we get in, we're doing it through tuition of feeds.
Speaker 1: And then of course the grants the university gets are
Speaker 1: also federal grants and this sort of thing. Um, then
Speaker 1: what you're doing is you're taking money that comes from
Speaker 1: all of the public and pre pandemic figures in terms
Speaker 1: of like this is before the mass disabling event that
Speaker 1: the pandemic is the of America. Adult Americans had at
Speaker 1: least one disability. So you're taking money from those folks,
Speaker 1: and you're saying, but we're not going to build this
Speaker 1: public university in a way that is not only like
Speaker 1: tolerable by you, but like a place where you could thrive.
Speaker 1: It doesn't even reach tolerable. It actually drives a lot
Speaker 1: of us out of here. It worse in health, and
Speaker 1: I have no doubt that it has killed people. So
Speaker 1: we so what happens. The reason I mentioned this is
Speaker 1: because that misappropriation to funds, you know, that's the incentive, right,
Speaker 1: What can if if if you're going off this austerity
Speaker 1: mindset that you shut off like people from things they need, right,
Speaker 1: what happens to that money? Well, we have an ADMIN
Speaker 1: that is completely bloated in size. We have every single
Speaker 1: chancellor getting a raise during a pandemic that they completely
Speaker 1: blew in terms of public health protections, in terms of
Speaker 1: accessibility even to people when they needed it ring the pandemic, Like,
Speaker 1: if they hadn't been fighting accessibility that long, we would
Speaker 1: have handled the pandemic better because we would have had
Speaker 1: better online pedagogy already available and developed. So it is
Speaker 1: that's a kind of jump that people don't make. But
Speaker 1: that's exactly what's going on. That's why they have the
Speaker 1: interest in putting this rationing and policing bureaucracy together to like,
Speaker 1: not many disabled people even get here because this is
Speaker 1: of course not the only ablest institution. It's hard to
Speaker 1: even get here. But then when you get here, they
Speaker 1: want to reduce who can get their access needs met.
Speaker 1: And then the access needs being met is such a
Speaker 1: gauntlet and only the most privileged of disabled people can
Speaker 1: get that. And so you know, as far as disabled
Speaker 1: people at at you see who are in the system
Speaker 1: so to speak, you know, are registered or whatever, that's
Speaker 1: going to not at all be representative of the public
Speaker 1: that's going to be mostly white folks with some access
Speaker 1: to privilege, you know, yeah, of course. And I think
Speaker 1: you've given a good sort of elucidation of why this
Speaker 1: is a struggle that obviously everyone should be part of,
Speaker 1: everyone should be getting behind, because it's like it's it's
Speaker 1: all of us whore invested in this in order of
Speaker 1: us are paying for this university which isn't accessible right now.
Speaker 1: So I wonder, like, what's your advice because there are
Speaker 1: unprecedented numbers of people forming unions right like Starbucks being
Speaker 1: one example that we see a lot of coverage of,
Speaker 1: but all across the country there are more people forming
Speaker 1: unions there and more people going on to strike. How
Speaker 1: should they organize around similar things? Like how should they
Speaker 1: organize around getting these access needs met? Well, I think
Speaker 1: I think you have to start by sweeping your old
Speaker 1: side of the street, which is that you have to
Speaker 1: make sure that your union communications, you're meetings, uh, everything
Speaker 1: about your union is accessible. And if you don't know
Speaker 1: how to do that, then that's where you start. You
Speaker 1: start with learning what accessibility is and how to make
Speaker 1: things accessible. Because what we found when we started, uh,
Speaker 1: when we came out kind of UC access, now did
Speaker 1: was you know, as you can imagine in a society
Speaker 1: where there are quite strong financial punishments for even to say,
Speaker 1: you know, even identifying as disabled. And what I mean
Speaker 1: by that is like say, again here on UC Davis,
Speaker 1: you were talking about how hard it was for you
Speaker 1: to get parking right, you know, when you had s
Speaker 1: chatter Pelvis, how it was to go every single day
Speaker 1: here on campus. There are able to employees driving trucks
Speaker 1: and vans that they drive straight up to the door
Speaker 1: of the building on the sidewalk, blocking egress for actual
Speaker 1: disabled people and actually blocking fire regress out of the
Speaker 1: building because that's what's you know, because they can't be
Speaker 1: bothered to twenty ft from the legal space that they
Speaker 1: have already have the privilege of being on campus compared
Speaker 1: to everybody else, right, but they but they had to
Speaker 1: have an even more convenient to that and then they
Speaker 1: drive straight up to the door, right. Nobody gives them.
Speaker 1: Nobody says boo about that. Nobody says you need to
Speaker 1: get a medical documentation, Nobody says you're getting fined and
Speaker 1: you're and you you don't get to drive this campus
Speaker 1: truck again or whatever, none of that goes on. What
Speaker 1: would happen. I guarantee you if that employee identified as
Speaker 1: disabled all of a sudden, then they would come down
Speaker 1: on that person for what they're doing. It's it's a
Speaker 1: real So because of these things, there's a lot of
Speaker 1: incentive for people to hide their disability because you get
Speaker 1: there's a lot of stigma, but there's also a real,
Speaker 1: quite real financial hit to it. And uh and so
Speaker 1: what happens once you sort of create a safer space
Speaker 1: to talk about it, people will start damning you, you know,
Speaker 1: and they will let you know that they're starting to
Speaker 1: have problems on the job or whatever. They may not
Speaker 1: be ready to come out for those like some people,
Speaker 1: it's obvious they're disabled, right, It's not even like they
Speaker 1: have a choice about quote unquote coming out right. But
Speaker 1: for other people, it's not obvious unless they tell you,
Speaker 1: and they have a lot of incentive to not you know,
Speaker 1: identify that way. Um, but when you make your union
Speaker 1: a safe and inclusive and accessible place, you will find
Speaker 1: that you have already been making assumptions about what your
Speaker 1: union membership is, so you already have members who are disabled.
Speaker 1: It's just that they're not telling you about it. But furthermore,
Speaker 1: if your union starts really um becoming an accessible inclusive place,
Speaker 1: you know, not performative really being there, like your your
Speaker 1: communications are accessible, you you're clearly UM educating yourselves around
Speaker 1: able is um educating yourselves around accessibility. So like when
Speaker 1: you have your meeting, it's not in uh a room
Speaker 1: that isn't wheelchair accessible, that doesn't have a working elevator
Speaker 1: on that floor. When you know all these things that
Speaker 1: people kind of don't think about until uh they're the
Speaker 1: one with the broken leg um, then that really goes
Speaker 1: some way to helping you organize things. And you will
Speaker 1: find you already have members that you can tap, you know,
Speaker 1: because they'll start to feel more for more involved once
Speaker 1: they see you're willing to go to bad from them.
Speaker 1: And what I would say that peaks folks should learn
Speaker 1: from the U see you a w experience right now.
Speaker 1: And this doesn't just refer to disabled work as it's
Speaker 1: really other marginalized workers, which is, you know, if you're
Speaker 1: in a contract bargaining situation and it's clear that like
Speaker 1: you're the bargaining chip, Like why would that why would
Speaker 1: that group want to hang with you. You're you're saying,
Speaker 1: support us and what we want, but we're gonna desert
Speaker 1: you when it's your time. You weren't gonna depend on
Speaker 1: the fact that everybody likes more pay, and we're just
Speaker 1: gonna say, Okay, you're gonna stick with us and and work,
Speaker 1: you know, with the union, no matter what it's like.
Speaker 1: Now a lot of people are gonna go, well, I'm
Speaker 1: sticking you know. You clearly don't support me, So I
Speaker 1: don't see why I need to go with you and
Speaker 1: put myself at risk because if you win, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: get the raise anyway. And uh and if you don't win,
Speaker 1: well then that's good for you because now you know
Speaker 1: how it feels like to be tossed aside, you know. So,
Speaker 1: so you have to really be there for your marginalized workers.
Speaker 1: You know. It has to be this non performative thing.
Speaker 1: But the but the thing is is that if you
Speaker 1: are non performative about it, you are you're making the
Speaker 1: workplace not only better from disabled workers you already have,
Speaker 1: but you are making it better for yourself because every
Speaker 1: single one of us pretty much is going to be disabled,
Speaker 1: either temporarily or permanently at some point. In our lives.
Speaker 1: It is the easiest club to join. And you know,
Speaker 1: I think, as we found during the pandemic. You know,
Speaker 1: people a lot of people they make this they say, oh,
Speaker 1: online sucks, online school sucks. Why does it suck because
Speaker 1: you never invested in it. It's like several several decades
Speaker 1: and old, you never invested in it. You never put
Speaker 1: any effort or money into it. Like that's you know,
Speaker 1: So if you want your workplace to be a good
Speaker 1: quality workplace for you, that is not only just like
Speaker 1: a place you barely you know, feel okay going to,
Speaker 1: but like someplace you really we spend most of our
Speaker 1: lives in the workplace, you know, right, so it should
Speaker 1: be someplace that really makes us feel better and fulfilled.
Speaker 1: Because nobody works well when they're stressed out. Nobody, you know,
Speaker 1: you're not productive when you're constantly stressed. So this really
Speaker 1: should be a win win all around. And and you're
Speaker 1: think about it this way also, which is that you know,
Speaker 1: and this is particularly applicable when it comes to you
Speaker 1: see and you know, the pandemic is another great example
Speaker 1: of this is this has gotten a little bit of
Speaker 1: focus on the press. But I don't think as much
Speaker 1: as it deserves, which is that you have this not
Speaker 1: only an event where millions of people died globally, right
Speaker 1: which you have. You have quite a few people, they
Speaker 1: have long COVID, they have other things. People who arrive
Speaker 1: at you see and particularly who go you know, get
Speaker 1: to the point they've got their degree or whatever. You know,
Speaker 1: these are people who are trained, highly educated, trained in
Speaker 1: a certain thing. They're making contributions to their field. Do
Speaker 1: you really want it to be that we lose all
Speaker 1: the knowledge that these people have, all the the institutional
Speaker 1: memory and experience that these people have, just at a
Speaker 1: time when we're facing an incredible crises as a planet,
Speaker 1: you know, in terms of climate change and in terms
Speaker 1: of you know, the attacks on democracies and things, or
Speaker 1: just even what the people mean to their community, right
Speaker 1: you know, you're talking about the fabric of your community.
Speaker 1: If you make it. If you have an inaccessible workplace,
Speaker 1: if you have an inaccessible school, if you have places
Speaker 1: you know in the public square that are not accessible,
Speaker 1: you're making it so that when somebody becomes disabled, and
Speaker 1: that person could be you, you may never be able
Speaker 1: to practice the thing that you love and you've trained
Speaker 1: for your whole life and the community loses what you
Speaker 1: could bring to this at a time when we need
Speaker 1: more than ever every all hands on deck to be
Speaker 1: like solving climate change and other problems that face us. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: that is it's very well said. Actually that yeah, sat
Speaker 1: he made a very good case. So I wonder, I
Speaker 1: mean obviously that the negotiations are still ongoing, at least
Speaker 1: for the SIU and for a I think as well, Um,
Speaker 1: so what can people do to support the demands that
Speaker 1: have been made? How can people maybe who are not
Speaker 1: part of the union, who are not part of the
Speaker 1: u C even or perhaps undergrad to are part of
Speaker 1: the u S but not part of the union, how
Speaker 1: how can they show solidarity and support here? Well, I
Speaker 1: think part of this is, you know, not giving up
Speaker 1: on the idea that we can press for the original
Speaker 1: access to needs article. I know there's all sorts of
Speaker 1: like you know, technical rules about regressive bargaining, but honestly,
Speaker 1: I think you see has broken a lot of the
Speaker 1: rules of bargaining. So I don't see why that doesn't
Speaker 1: you know what It's like, what's good for the goose
Speaker 1: is good for the gander. As far as I'm concerned,
Speaker 1: but there's also even outside of bargaining. You know, as
Speaker 1: I said, a lot of these things are things that
Speaker 1: you see routinely breaks a d A you see routinely
Speaker 1: breaks There's other parts of disability law in terms of
Speaker 1: Section five oh for the Rehabilitation Act, and there's some
Speaker 1: California law as well as my understanding of it. So
Speaker 1: you know, you see, just as they have this rationing
Speaker 1: and Policing agency bureaucracy, and it's two separate silos, one
Speaker 1: for students and one for workers, and they do that.
Speaker 1: Like even the fact that they do that communicates that
Speaker 1: it's not about offering accessibility as a default, because why
Speaker 1: would you have two silos for that. Well, you have
Speaker 1: two silos for that because the law that affects students
Speaker 1: and affects workers are slightly different. So what you're coming
Speaker 1: from is this aspect of we are dedicated to only
Speaker 1: doing the barest minimum of the minimum required by law,
Speaker 1: so we don't even want to meet that minimum required
Speaker 1: by law. It's like it's like, you know, you want
Speaker 1: to offer minimum wage, but if you can get away
Speaker 1: with it, you're not even going to meet minimum wage.
Speaker 1: And you have a lot of lawyers in a bureaucracy
Speaker 1: to make it possible for you to do that. That's
Speaker 1: what you see does um So that kind of stuff
Speaker 1: is stuff that outside of even a labor contract, you
Speaker 1: should be a to write the governor, right, the lieutenant governor,
Speaker 1: who's actually got a seat on the board of regents.
Speaker 1: Rights here, California legislators, you know when there was a
Speaker 1: there was a nimby who sued cal This was in
Speaker 1: the news this year. There was a nimby who sued
Speaker 1: Cow to make it so the cal Con make housing
Speaker 1: and and or to Cow to make it so the
Speaker 1: Cow was gonna have to limit how many it was
Speaker 1: admitting because in the opinion of that group, like they
Speaker 1: weren't building enough housing to take care of their students,
Speaker 1: and they were crowding at Berkeley and blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: The outrage about that from parents who wanted to send
Speaker 1: their kids to Cow was so great that like within
Speaker 1: a couple of weeks, the governor and the legislators had
Speaker 1: passed something to address that. If you put that kind
Speaker 1: of pressure on the governor of the lieutenant governor and
Speaker 1: the you know, your state legisslators, they will make sure
Speaker 1: that the UC Office of the president feels that pressure
Speaker 1: because these are things. These are laws. You know, at
Speaker 1: the we had more ambitious things beyond law. But some
Speaker 1: of the things that we were that are trying to
Speaker 1: do in this contract are really just things that they're
Speaker 1: already required by a lot of do but aren't doing.
Speaker 1: We were trying to give it and make it so
Speaker 1: there was more teeth there, because clearly the federal and
Speaker 1: state teeth weren't good enough. So we um we have
Speaker 1: a resist spot petition out there, but you know, to
Speaker 1: make it a little easier to contact your If you're
Speaker 1: a California resident, the resist pot petition would work that way.
Speaker 1: But if but if not, you know, like I said,
Speaker 1: if you if you, if you're a parent of a
Speaker 1: student here, you can write. If you're an alumni, you
Speaker 1: know you can write, just really hammer them about it. Okay, Yeah, yeah, definitely.
Speaker 1: I think I think writing does make a difference. And
Speaker 1: I think especially for an institution that I don't quite
Speaker 1: know how financially dependent they are in donations, but they
Speaker 1: certainly do like to solicit them, especially if you're an alum.
Speaker 1: This because they solicit them for me a lot, I
Speaker 1: do not have that much money so yeah, thank you
Speaker 1: very much for sharing all of that with us. And
Speaker 1: I thought that's really really instructive. How can people find
Speaker 1: you and how can people find you? See access now
Speaker 1: if they want to find you online? Uh, we are
Speaker 1: on Twitter as access you see at access you see um.
Speaker 1: We are on Facebook and Instagram as well. Actually is
Speaker 1: also linked in for the more business people. Uh you
Speaker 1: see access now um. And you can also reach us
Speaker 1: at you see access now at gmail dot com if
Speaker 1: you wanted to email us. Wonderful. Yeah, thank you very much,
Speaker 1: And just to Finnish that briefly, we are going to
Speaker 1: try and make a transcript. It's available at the same
Speaker 1: time the episode goes out, and so folks would like
Speaker 1: to read it that way if that's easier for them
Speaker 1: than We're going to make sure that we have that
Speaker 1: for this one. So yeah, if you're if you're listening,
Speaker 1: or if you think someone else that you know would
Speaker 1: like this and listening doesn't work for them, that we're
Speaker 1: going to do that. Thank you so much, Megan for
Speaker 1: giving us some of your afternoon. And yeah, I hope
Speaker 1: you see some support and I wish you the best
Speaker 1: of luck with everything. Well, thank you so much. It
Speaker 1: Could Happen Here as a production of cool Zone Media.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website
Speaker 1: cool zone media dot com or check us out on
Speaker 1: the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
Speaker 1: listen to podcasts. You can find sources for It could
Speaker 1: Happen Here, updated monthly at cool zone Media dot com
Speaker 1: slash sources. Thanks for listening.