This faculty member agreed to speak with us “on background” to protect their identity. To preserve the integrity of their perspective, we are presenting this interview in a question-and-answer format to avoid misrepresentation or alternate interpretations. Their insights contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the strike’s dynamics. Our goal in this interview is to provide a nuanced exploration of the strike, including the internal divisions and pressures faculty members face during this challenging time.
Q: Would you be willing to share a general overview of your teaching role at the College?
I teach pretty much everything—from introductory 100-level classes for non-majors, to courses for other majors who need to fulfill a requirement, to intro and mid-level classes for majors. I’ve also taught cross-listed and 300-level classes, including some I’ve designed myself.
Q: Do you mentor any majors or theses?
I do have advisees and have advised theses in the past. Since I don’t conduct my own research, thesis students I’ve worked with are typically doing research with someone elsewhere. My role is to help keep them on track, ask informed questions and provide feedback — without necessarily being an expert in the specific field. It’s one way students can pursue research in areas not directly supported at Wellesley.
Q: Generally speaking, how has the strike affected your experience as a non-tenure track faculty member thus far?
Barely at all.
Q: Are you a member of the union?
No. That was a decision made last year.
Q: Could you walk me through your decision to continue teaching during the strike? Were there particular factors — personal, professional or financial — that weighed most heavily in your decision?
I agreed to the contract that I’m now on and felt it was a reasonable contract — reasonable terms, reasonable pay, reasonable workload. I like teaching and I don’t feel the same grievances that the union is expressing in the same way.
Q: Was this a difficult decision for you? Why or why not?
Not particularly. I would like the union to achieve its objectives — if people want to pay me more money and give me more benefits, then great! But I didn’t feel a reason for me to go on strike.
Q: Do you feel your position is understood or respected by colleagues who chose to strike?
I haven’t talked much with many colleagues about this. The reason that I ask for this to remain on-background is that there are strong feelings on both sides about the strike. I think that no matter what I say and no matter what quotes you publish from this, someone will get angry at it, and so I didn’t want to jeopardize those relationships.
Q: Have you experienced any pressure from colleagues or students regarding your decision not to strike?
No. My colleagues, particularly the tenured and tenure tracks, have been studiously either avoiding the subject or not bringing it up with me. So I think there may have been a directive not to talk about this.
Q: As an NTT faculty member, do you feel your labor and voice are valued by the institution? How has the strike changed or reinforced that feeling?
I feel like in general I’ve had good relationships with people at the institution. The way that organizations value labor is by a salary, and so that number is a very precise statement of how much they value my labor.
As for my voice, there are many things I don’t say. Not necessarily because I’m NTT, but because speech can feel stifled on campus. If I cared enough, I’d speak out regardless, but I don’t want to just offer casual opinions that could become inflammatory.
Q: Do you think there are structural challenges that make it harder for NTT faculty to participate in collective actions like this strike?
You know, you see these daily emails from Courtney Coile, and there is quite a bit of sensationalism on both sides. I mean, I don’t personally feel as pressured as I think some people are.
Q: What kind of changes would you like to see in how NTT faculty are treated or supported at Wellesley?
You know, like any job, there are parts of it that I really like, like teaching, and there are parts I don’t. I don’t know whether the downsides are about being NTT specifically, but they’re not the kinds of things that are addressed in the union grievances. For example, I’ve had a senior colleague speak to me in a manner that made me wonder: Would this person have talked to me that way if I were tenured? Were they just having a bad day? Am I being a jerk? For any kind of minority or precarious position, there’s rarely outright prejudice. But, it happens from time to time that there are these ambiguous situations that are more an issue of personal respect than of salary or workload or titles. I invite my students to call me by my first name because I know that you will assess me and have respect for me based on my demeanor in the classroom, how responsible I am, etc. Not based on whether I have a title or not.
In this way, I think that the issues of the strike are a little bit off from the issues that are being addressed on the picket lines. So that’s the vocabulary that’s available, to address what seems to me to have at least as much a psychological component as an economic component.
Q: What do you think students and the broader community often misunderstand about the NTT experience in academia and teaching?
I think that students have not historically been as aware of who is tenure track and who’s not tenure track. I think Katie Hall even said this in one of her recent communications, and this is something that I’ve known as well. And ironically, it’s the union that has brought that to prominence. Now, everyone knows who’s tenured and who’s not. So, what reports to be a movement that levels these status divisions has actually exacerbated them because now everyone knows this person is tenured and this person is not tenured.
Also, there is this assumption that a two-year position will attract “better” candidates than a one-year one. But people take jobs for many reasons, and not everyone wants a permanent job. More stability is not necessarily better.
The tenure process is so psychologically powerful for those who go through it because it was so significant for them. For people who’ve gone through the tenure process, being on the tenure line is an unmitigated good. But there are pros to not being tenure track that not everyone is aware of. I never wanted the administrative responsibilities that come with tenure: the committee memberships, the governance of whatever limited governance tenured faculty have in the College. In fact, I’m very willing to forego a higher salary to avoid those burdens and really just concentrate on teaching and pursuing my own interests which may or may not align with publishing research papers.
Q: Have you felt supported or acknowledged by the administration as an NTT faculty member during this time? Do you feel there has been clear communication from the administration about expectations and procedures during the strike?
I’ve heard nothing from the College about anything. I have to fill out an attestation form every week which is something new, and there is this presumption that I’m not teaching unless I tell them that I am.
I have very little contact with the administration. I think they’re just kind of making it up as they go along.
Q: Has the current situation changed how you view your relationship to the institution or your job security?
It has underscored that my relationship to the institution is purely transactional, that I am trading my time and my labor for money. Any feeling of attachment on my part to the institution is sentimental foolishness. That is not to say that I’m not attached and care deeply about my students. But, you know, that’s the nature of capitalist exchange. That was always the case, but it’s just more salient now.
Contact the editors responsible for this story: Phoebe Rebhorn and Sazma Sarwar.
