Attention, part-time profs: Are you in or are you out? Starting today, adjunct faculty at American University will begin voting on whether or not to join the Service Employees International Union.

Supporters say collective bargaining can help improve pay and job security for adjuncts, the academic world’s version of migrant labor. Non-tenure-track faculty are generally paid much less than their tenured counterparts ($3,000-$4,000 per course at American, according to union advocates; the average salary at the school is $70,626 for an assistant professor and $150,025 for a full professor).

“We’re over 40 percent of the faculty at AU, but we essentially get four percent of the salary budget,” says Erik Cooke, an adjunct instructor in the university’s philosophy department and supporter of unionization. “We’re highly-trained, committed faculty members, just like full-time professors,” he says.

At AU, some 500 adjuncts handle roughly 30 percent of the courseload, according to Camille Lepre, an AU spokeswoman. The school is hardly alone in relying on cheap scholarly labor. In his book How the University Works, Marc Bousquet writes that non-tenure-trackers now represent 75 percent of all teaching positions in American higher education, up from 25 percent in 1970.

“I know adjuncts who cobble their life together with part-time jobs outside of school. They work evenings, they work weekends,” says Mark Plane, a Public Archaeologist in Residence at AU. Plane is teaching three classes this year for $2,900 apiece. He is also providing administrative support in the anthropology department. For his efforts, he takes home a total of $19,700, with no benefits.

Plane’s employer, though, is not so fond of the notion of a union. In an email, Lepre disputes the union advocates’ assertions about adjuncts’ wages. “$3,000-4,000 is not a viable average and the university doesn't agree with it as a ballpark,” she writes. “There are many adjuncts outside that range.” (She wouldn’t say what range the university thinks is more accurate.)

Besides, she says, full-timers have responsibilities beyond teaching. “Tenure and tenure-track faculty are not only teaching classes; they perform research, serve on department committees, represent the university in other ways, and have other obligations and responsibilities that adjunct faculty do not have.”

The school’s public response to the election has been muted. Questioned about AU’s stance on the election, Lepre directed Washington City Paper to a December letter to the campus community from Provost Scott Bass. “As the election process unfolds, the university welcomes free and fair exchange of views on the advantages and disadvantages of the union for our community,” Bass wrote.

Bass cast AU as a decent employer, noting increases in the budget for adjunct pay, free parking, and professional development grants. Though the administration says it has “concerns” about unionization, it has professed its neutrality in the coming vote.

What are those concerns? Under the mantle of “Frequently Asked Questions,” on a website devoted to the union vote, the university notes that most SEIU contracts require union membership as a condition for employment, it is very difficult to “decertify” a union should the professors change their mind, and that adjuncts should expect to pay $26 a paycheck in union dues.

It’s true that SEIU would represent all AU adjuncts, according to Anne McLeer, Local 500’s director of research and strategic planning. McLeer contests that $26-a-paycheck claim, though: Local 500 union dues are $29 a month, she says, and professors who choose not to join the union would pay a fee equivalent to about 85 percent of member dues. That works out to $24.65 a month.

The votes will be counted on Feb. 16. A simple majority will determine the outcome.

What AU’s adjuncts will get for their dues isn’t entirely clear. The organize-the-adjuncts campaign has been going on at private universities across the country. Locally, SEIU has represented George Washington University adjuncts since 2004. SEIU hasn’t eradicated the gap between part-timers and full-timers, but they have scored increases in pay. After unionization, the minimum per course jumped from $2,500 to $3,300 in GWU’s English department, an increase that McLeer said was typical across departments. Now, adjunct faculty at GWU are paid at least $3,400 or $3,915 a course depending on credentials. “If I made that, last semester would have been a hell of a lot easier,” Plane says.

The only major benefit available to GWU adjuncts is a retirement plan with no university contribution. As for job security, GWU is now obliged to give back to adjuncts any course they have taught for four semesters or more, unless they stop offering it to students altogether.

Across the District line, SEIU Local 500 organized adjuncts at Montgomery College in 2008. But at this cash-strapped community college, the union only got an 11 percent pay increase, according to McLeer. Other perks in the contract include a professional development fund and the opportunity for veteran adjuncts to get annual appointments. The union has gotten enhanced paid leave and a stipend for participation in the school’s wellness program, but not health insurance or other benefits.

Nationwide, only 8 percent of adjuncts at private colleges and universities are unionized. Most of their unions have sprung up within last ten years. “The range in gains is tremendous, from virtual revolution in conditions and pay to small incremental gains,” according to Joe Berry, author of Reclaiming the Ivory Tower: Organizing Adjuncts to Change Higher Education. Columbia College in Chicago may be on the “incremental” end of that range. Before adjunct faculty there unionized in 1994, they earned $1,440 per course. Now they get anywhere between $1,500 and $4,770, but still don’t enjoy any benefits or job security measures. New York University adjuncts have been more successful. When they joined United Auto Workers in 2004, they secured a 19 percent pay raise over six years. They now also have access to health insurance, a pension, and an arbitration process to address employee grievances. And at the New School, UAW won dramatic increases in minimum pay. It was about $35 an hour before 2005; by 2008 hourly pay ranged from $53 to $95.

Despite the uneven gains elsewhere, union supporters at AU enter the election period confident. “It just makes sense,” Cooke says of unionization. “We have just as much training and just as much commitment to our students as other faculty members. The disparity there needs to be equalized.”

The event is disturbing, but so is the Post's coverage of it.

First of all, the tone is eerily matter-of-fact. One would imagine that death by trash compactor would be a horrifying and potentially gory way to meet your maker, but this is nowhere reflected in the Post's dispassionate narrative. The probable cause of death isn't explained, and readers are left wondering. Was his body mutilated by the trash compacting? We don't know, because the Post doesn't say.

Second: There's no emotion. Granted, the man's family declined to comment, but there's nothing in the article to suggest that this tragic loss of human life is anything more than a mildly curious occurrence.

"It's so static," Neil Donovan, executive director of the National Coalition for the Homeless, says of the article. The word choice used to describe Lindolph's death is "almost similar to the products being recycled, the cardboard, you know?"

Third: There's no context. Articles like this often seek out qualified commenters—such as university professors or employees at nonprofits—to situate the reported news in a broader background.

You'd think such a morbidly fascinating event would warrant this explanation. Was the incident a sad consequence of the thousands-deep waiting list for Section 8 housing? Another bitter story from tough economic times? The Post doesn't ask anyone.

Last, and worst of all: The Post implies Lindolph is to blame for his own death! The closing sentence of a newspaper article determines what taste readers will have in their mouth, so to speak, after they're done reading. In the case of accidental and unfortunate death, you'd expect that the article would convey that tragedy with its parting thought. Instead, the article quotes a police spokesman, who scolds Lindolph for finding shelter in one of the only places a homeless person can find it:

"He said the incident highlights the dangers of sleeping in dumpsters.

'Those dumpsters clearly are designed for trash only,' he said."

Translation: It's your own fucking fault for sleeping in a dumpster. No shit, they're "designed for trash only"; they're dumpsters. Homeless people know that. But they sometimes choose to sleep in them, despite potential nausea and health risks, because desperate circumstances make the semblance of warmth and privacy to be found amongst the garbage of other, more fortunate people an attractive option.

Now, compare this to another Washington Post article, this one on a different accidental death last week: that of nine-year-old Oscar Fuentes.

A number of things are different: The opening sentence is dramatic, not mundane. The article is brimming with emotion. While the victim's immediate family couldn't be reached for comment, the Post sought the comments of numerous others: non-immediate relatives, neighbors, witnesses. And the article examines Fuente's death not as an isolated, happenchance occurrence, but within the broader context of the ongoing gentrification of Columbia Heights.

Why the disparity? "We all kind of subscribe to this hierarchy," Donovan says. He calls it "the compassion scale." Victims of fires garner more compassion than victims of domestic violence, for instance. "There are the persistent poor who live among us, and when something happens to a couple of them, we set it on this continuum." To the Post, Oscar Fuentes is higher than Marcellous Lindolph Jr on the compassion scale, thus warranting a more detailed, human portrayal.

"We should flatten the hierarchy," Donovan says, "and treat all of our brothers and sisters as equals. That is the moral imperative."

The Issue:

Now Hold On a Just Minute Here: When Pepco goons with chainsaws showed up and began chopping down the 400 trees, the Palisades Citizens Association (PCA) was pissed. "Pepco was springing it on the neighborhood without any prior consultation," Spence Spencer, the association president, said. He and his neighbors were concerned that losing the trees on MacArthur would "de-nude whole blocks" of a street that is one of the few in D.C. with a tree canopy. He says a letter of concern to Pepco went unanswered. It was only after Mayor Adrian Fenty made a visit to the Palisades in October that Pepco began to listen. According to Spencer, Fenty "basically" said: "Look, Pepco, you guys have gotta come up with a more tree-friendly approach." Fenty imposed a moratorium on tree work until a plan was approved by the PCA.

It's All Good: According to Pepco, the Palisades tree canopy was responsible for over 100 hours of lost power in the neighborhood in 2007 and 2008. Pepco media representative Clay Anderson said that the District asked Pepco to improve reliability, and that Pepco has been paying attention to the community all along. "We're pretty much okay with the folks out there now," he says of the beef. The company submitted two plans to the PCA last week—one that had little tree pruning on MacArthur, and one that had none.

What's Next: It's up to Palisades residents to decide. "We're evaluating what on the face looks like a positive proposal, even though it took Fenty to get them to pay attention to community," says Spencer. For the moment, Palisades folks are assuaged, according to Spencer, but "there needs to be a long-term dialogue about this. They've got a two-year cutting cycle on trees," he says, "so best case, all that we've done is forstalled what might be another round of mass cutting of trees in the Palisades two years from now."

Photograph by Darrow Montgomery.

1. WTOP reported this morning on the Census Bureau's research on travel patterns in the D.C. metro area. The findings: of the region's 2.2 million workers, about 1.5 million commute alone, and about 600,000 carpool or use public transit. The average commute time was about 32 minutes.

2. The average yearly carbon footprint of each of these commutes is about 1.75 tons of carbon dioxide, according to my rough calculations. (That's using a 14.4 mile commute–roughly the round trip from K Street to Bethesda. 14.4 miles yield .007 tons of carbon at 20 miles per gallon. .007 multiplied by 250 work days a year gets you 1.75 tons.)

3. With 1,415,834 people commuting alone, 1.75 tons per commuter is a total of 2,477,709 tons. Add in the carpool and public transit folks at half the rate of emission, and you've got yourself a grand total of 3,002,709 tons of carbon dioxide.

4. Scroll down this list of CO2 emissions by nation, and you'll find that number 127, Benin, emits 3,109,000 tons a year. The D.C. metro area's collective daily commute causes the same amount of environmental destruction as day-to-day life in all of Benin! Yeah! (And the D.C. numbers represent only the actual commute, not other major sources of emission like electricity, food consumption, road trips, and all that jazz.)

Other nations with smaller carbon footprints: Palestine, New Caledonia, Madagascar, Namibia, and 78 others.

(You can find the official United Nations stats here.)

Pete Piringer, Director of Public Information for E.M.S. and the Fire Department, says that the facility at 2630 16th St. is now safe for habitation. "Hazardous materials personnel we're given entrance, and we were able to just assist them with some ventilation," he says.

It was "natural ventilation," he says. "We just opened some windows, and I think we also ran some fans in there."

"There was no fire, no injuries" according to Piringer. Washington Gas is now on the scene to help determine the origin of the leak.

Sunday, New Hampshire Ave. & Randolph St. NW.

McKinley Technology High School lost 15 staff members on Oct. 3 to controversial "reductions in force," an effort by Chancellor Michelle Rhee to fix what she says is a budget deficit in District schools. The teachers were escorted out of the school by police, as if they posed a danger to their pupils. Students were angered, and hundreds of them left school to denounce the moves, garnering the attention of the media, teachers advocates, and the D.C. Council.

Over a week later, the episode still casts its shadow at McKinley. “The whole atmosphere totally changed,” according to senior Jessy Beach, an organizer of the protests. “You can sense the dreariness,” says Kyler Jackson, a sophomore. "Overall, it's just very gloomy," says senior Ikechukwu Umez-Eronini.

McKinley is one of the District’s highest-performing schools. Its Web site boasts of high Advanced Placement and D.C. test scores—the school has made Adequate Yearly Progress, a key federal benchmark, five years in a row. Incoming students must turn in an application, essay, and four recommendations to be considered for admission. Erika Landberg, program director at education nonprofit DC VOICE, likens McKinley to other DCPS gems like Duke Ellington, Benjamin Banneker, and School Without Walls. "Kids all across the city really try and get in that school," she says.

So when students complain that Chancellor Rhee's RIF process has damaged the school's climate, it means something.

There's been "a lot of chaos in the school" since the layoffs, says Beach. Last week, fire alarms went off sporadically, some students protested by not wearing school uniforms, and some weren’t going to class. “Ever since the RIFs, kids have felt betrayed, so they rebel or they don't listen,” she says.

Classes have been affected, as well. "Right now, I have three classes that were switched around," says sophomore Kahn Branch. He was enrolled in an SAT class before the RIFs, and was planning to take another next semester. But "that class is not offered anymore, so I was gonna be moved to JROTC," he says. "But I decided not to take that so now I have to take African-American History."

Branch isn't the only one with a schedule in upheaval, but he's a minority, according to DCPS spokesperson Jennifer Calloway. She wrote in an email that of McKinley's 710 students, "fewer than 100 students saw any change in their course schedules." She says only two classes have been eliminated completely.

Interpretations of how the school has changed seem to vary by age. All of freshman Jamika Aceveda’s classes are the same. “I can't base the school on the protests,” she says. “The vibe is still fun.” But seniors lost two popular guidance counselors, who were relied upon for help with the college admissions process.

Umez-Eronini says that Principal David Pinder promised "that schedules wouldn't be really affected, that he wouldn't fire necessary teachers and necessary counselors." Now he feels that promise was broken. Pinder directed questions to DCPS's press operation.

One of those let go was Sheila Gill, a popular guidance counselor. Now seniors are concerned about their college admissions process. “We lost the person who dealt with our transcripts,” says Beach. Under the new reduced staff, seniors share a counselor with the freshmen. Beach says it’s harder to get appointments for help with college applications, since their counselor is also responsible for the ninth graders.

On the allegation of broken promises, Calloway says that "students were promised that the integrity of their schedules would remain." She says that McKinley's two counselors are buttressed by a full-time D.C. College Access Program representative, and two "college support teams" of three teachers each.

"We recognize that students are upset," Calloway says. "The school administration has held student assemblies to hear their concerns and to address many of their questions." She also says that "school officials are working closely with student government to build a positive climate going forward."

Others in the McKinley community are unsatisfied with school administration. "There is an absolute lack of trust that has developed between the students, the principal, and many of the parents," says Iris Toyer, McKinley parent and chairperson of advocacy group Parents United. "They will not look at the principal the same."

Some students are moving on. School is “flowing like it never really happened,” Jamika Aceveda says of the layoffs.

Others are fighting it out. Says Umez-Eronini: “It ought not be like that, because, you know, we're in high school," he says. "It's supposed to be one of the happier times of your life–you know, it's my senior year. I really shouldn't be waging some huge political injustice on my own behalf."

"The accompanying story by June Kronholz is, as the picture suggests, almost uniformly admiring. Although it doesn't address what happened to the real Braveheart, Scottish rebel William Wallace, who was hanged, disemboweled, beheaded and quartered in 1305 for rising up against the British crown."

One commenter brings the discussion back into the current millennium: "I don't want Rhee to be beheaded, I just want her to resign."

Since Rhee took office in 2007, it's become quite trendy to follow the fiery Chancellor around for awhile and then write a breathless profile about her crusade to fix D.C.'s schools. C'mon, Education Next, all the cool kids are doing it. For interested readers, here's a sampling:

September 2007: "Can Michelle Rhee Save DC Schools?" Washingtonian.com.

October 2007: "A hard road to hoe: teaching poor children." The Economist.

August 2008: "An Unlikely Gambler." Newsweek.

November 2008: "Rhee Tackles Classroom Challenge." TIME.

November 2008: "The Lightning Rod." The Atlantic.

January 2009: "Is Michelle Rhee the new face of education reform?" Christian Science Monitor.

March 2009: "Education's Ground Zero." Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times.

(Note: Most of them are "almost uniformly admiring.")

The article says the bill "was drafted on behalf of a Capitol Hill family," who used their small backyard to house eight hens until animal control intervened. Well's Chief-of-Staff, Charles Allen, said that the family and a few friends approached the Councilmember to request legislation.

"This is all part of that sustainable urban life we're trying to create," Allen said, evoking the recent spike in the popularity of community gardening.

Caryn Ernst, owner of the original chickens, told the Examiner that "from our perspective they were pets." She said her family of four garnered "an egg a day" from their fowl friends. "We already go through a dozen eggs a week, and we would love it if our eggs came from our own backyard."

Allen said the hens had been used for lessons at nearby Peabody Elementary School. Students in one classroom incubated an egg, and then raised the newborn chicken.

Ernst said that a "total stranger" passed a tip to animal control, who then came, confiscated the offending chickens, and took them to a farm in Virginia. Since January 2007, the D.C. Department of Health has carried out 28 livestock pickups, according to Communications Director Dena Iverson. "Please keep in mind they were not all confiscated from owners," she said in an email. Most were strays that were scooped up by the humane society. The rundown of captured livestock-at-large, according to Iverson: "20 chickens, 1 duck, 1 goat, 1 sheep, and 5 guinea fowl."

Allen claimed that "several" constituents have sought out Wells to express their support for the bill, but he "wouldn't hazard a guess" as to how many Ward 6 residents would be interesting in acquiring backyard chickens, if the law were passed.

The backyard chicken bill has its political foes, too. "We also have some neighbors saying 'Absolutely not. I don't want a chicken next door to me,'" Allen says. He pointed out that the legislation includes a mechanism that would bar chicken ownership at the objection of one neighbor.

"Getting a dog or cat in the city and keeping it in your backyard is pretty easy," said Allen. "This is much more stringent than any other pet."

It certainly seems that Councilmember Wells has his finger on the pulse of the community, communicating with neighbors and addressing their concerns in Council. But his constituents aren't only plagued by repressive poultry zoning. Ward 6 had a 21% poverty rate during the last census, over 10 percent unemployment in July, and a violent crime rate a touch above the D.C. average.

"This bill is not his highest priority," Charles Allen said. He insisted that the chickens only became  a major time commitment when reporters began bombarding his office with phone calls.

Wells said he wants to follow the lead of other metro areas like Baltimore and Buffalo, and "be more permissive about urban hens." The "Urban Farming Act of 2009" is currently in committee.

Davita Simpson, 54, perches a cross the street from Metro Center. She leans against the wall by an ATM, timidly promoting Street Sense to the sharply-dressed weekday morning pedestrians. Selling the paper isn’t a great source of income, she says, “but it helps me get by.” Simpson is currently homeless. She began selling papers about a year ago to supplement her SSI checks.

At a time when newspapers all over the country are dropping like flies, Street Sense, the biweekly nonprofit newspaper on homelessness and poverty whose neon-vested vendors are omnipresent around Metro stations and commercial strips, is growing.

The paper, whose contributors are largely homeless, faced an uncertain future earlier this year. “We kind of saw the writing on the wall,” says Street Sense Executive Director Laura Thompson Osuri, referring to falling donations and withering grant support.

On April 15^th, the paper’s front page read “Nonprofits in Peril.” Inside was a plea for donors to “SUPPORT THE STREET SENSE BAILOUT,” as well as reflections from vendors on what they would without Street Sense in their life. (The vendors, who are currently or formerly homeless, buy each paper for 35 cents, sell them for a dollar, and pocket the difference. For many, it’s their only source of income.)

Osuri says that the survival of Street Sense was never in peril, but the nonprofit began “planning for the worst.” They explored potential options if the organization ran out of money: merging with another nonprofit, or folding and allowing another organization to pick up the newspaper.

The April “call for help” raised a lot of money, according to Osuri. “We’re doing much better than we were.” Street Sense also brought relief to its budget by reducing paper quality, and increasing the price paid by vendors from 25 cents per paper to the current 35 cents.

Despite the declining outside revenue, Street Sense is growing. “There’s more people buying now than when I first started,” says Simpson. In the year she’s been a vendor, her daily haul has gone from about $40 to $80.

Vendors who have lost income from odd jobs are increasingly relying on the paper, Osuri says. She calls it the “Catch-22 of nonprofits. The income to support your organization is down, while the demand for your work is up.”

The days ahead look brighter. At the end of 2007, there were about 70 vendors circulating 20,000 papers a month. Now, almost 100 vendors distribute about 15,000 copies each issue—30,000 in a month. “Street Sense has hit a critical mass where a lot of people know about it and have come to respect it,” says Osuri.

The nonprofit is tentatively planning to drop the vendor price back down to 25 cents next year, but that the increased cost hasn’t hampered sellers. For many, Street Sense is still a stepping stone to a more comfortable life, says Osuri. “Our vendors are still improving their lives–getting other jobs, moving into housing.”

Davita Simpson hopes that she’ll soon be among them. “I’ve been waiting 12 years for housing,” she says. “And its cold out here.”

"The teachers were asked if they like how the school system is run and to provide reasons for their answers. Eighty percent of the teachers replied no to this question, 8 percent replied yes."

The remaining 12 percent said they both like and dislike aspects of DCPS management.

When the 80 percent were asked to explain their discontent, the most common response was "a lack of respect for and blaming of teachers." Other frequent complaints are "poor communication between the District and local schools" and "a rigid governance structure" that "does not pay attention to what is happening in the classroom, nor allow for questions to be asked."

11% is certainly not pretty, but D.C.'s actual unemployment rate is probably higher, because the unemployment rate that appears in the newspaper is often misleading.

The problem? It doesn't include what the Bureau of Labor Statistics calls "marginally attached workers"–people who want a job, but aren't looking because they don't think there's much chance of getting one. Also left out are those who are involuntarily working part-time.

The BLS calculates D.C.'s "U-6" unemployment rate which includes these folks, but only every year. Over the past year, the District had a U-6 rate of 12%, but that was when conventional unemployment averaged only 8%. Apply this ratio to today's number, and you're looking at a city with 16.5% of people unable to find adequate work.

One contribution, though, sticks out among the lawyers and executives: $1,000 from "Spitzer, Eliot" at "985 5th Ave, New York, NY 10021" back in June.

Why does the disgraced former governor of New York have any stake in the mayor's re-election bid?

"I've met him, he's a good person, he's worked hard, and so I like to support candidates like that, people like that who work hard for their city," Spitzer told the Washington City Paper over the phone.

Spitzer's donation came a few months after he helped engineer the purchase by his father's company of a $180 million downtown D.C. office building. Did the purchase affect his decision to support Fenty?

"Absolutely not," Spitzer said. "One has absolutely nothing to do with the other. To suggest the two are related is, frankly, quite stupid."

The mayor is "a friend and somebody who I admire," Spitzer said, but refused to explain their relationship any further. Pressed on the matter, he said only that the two "met in a governmental context."

Fenty said that the donation came from a fundraiser in New York. Who held the fundraiser? "I'll get you that information," said Fenty.

The mayor said he had no second thoughts about accepting donations from a guy who'd used the District as a call-girl liaison pad. He also acknowledged milking his relationship with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other Big Apple muni-luminaries to build up his campaign coffers.

"We've had a great working relationship particularly with the city of New York," he said. "It's a relationship that spans between city hall, education, and our similar passions on that end. There's a strong development community that works between New York and Washington D.C."

Fenty is the third candidate to receive a contribution from the ex-governor, after Mark Green and Cy Vance Jr. Is he flattered by that distinction?

"I guess the best thing to say about any particular donation is every single one of them is important. Every single one of them is appreciated."

Additional reporting by Mike DeBonis