Wednesday, May 05, 2010

[olympiaworkers] Evergreen Labor Center Moving to South Seattle CC

Statement by Evergreen Labor Center Director Peter Kardas on the Labor Center Move to South Seattle Community College

May 4, 2010

 

The Governor has signed the state’s operating budget, and what was rumor is now fact:  the Labor Center is moving to South Seattle Community College, effective July 1st, 2010.  After 23 years the Labor Center will no longer have a physical presence at The Evergreen State College.  Why is this happening?  Who or what is behind the move?  And what are the prospects that South Seattle will be a good home for the Labor Center?

 

The main reason that Labor Center staff began a year ago to explore the idea of a move was the 50% cut to our budget that took effect July 1st, 2009.  That cut, which was imposed by the Evergreen administration, came only two years after the legislature and governor, with the encouragement of the Washington State Labor Council and many labor unions, doubled our budget, giving a taste for the first time in the Labor Center’s history of what an adequate amount of funding might look like.  The cut also came with the suggestion that the college might impose further cuts in 2011 to all public service centers, including the Labor Center, if state revenues did not pick up.  The prospects for holding on to current funding, let alone returning to our high budget mark or expanding beyond it, seemed very grim.  Therefore, it seemed smart to explore the possibility of transferring what funds we have left to another institution that might be more willing to support us for the long haul.  And so last summer we approached the Washington State Labor Council and allies in labor unions to explore that possibility.

 

The idea of moving to South Seattle Community College (and the Georgetown campus in particular) was suggested by a number of folks (including people who don’t live in Seattle!).  Why South Seattle?  The highest union density in the state (and therefore the greatest potential demand for labor education) is in the central Puget Sound region.  There are a number of apprenticeships and other union education programs on the Georgetown campus, and dozens of unions have their headquarters within a 15 mile radius of the campus.  In addition, labor leaders in that geographic region have expressed strong support for the Center’s move to Georgetown.  So has the faculty union on campus, as have legislators with union backgrounds from the region.  In other words, there’s lots of interest in the move to South, lots of support from key players, lots of need for labor education in that geographical area – and therefore, lots of reasons to think that the move will be good for the Labor Center’s fundamental mission of “providing direct educational and research services to labor unions and worker-centered organizations.”

 

The work of negotiating the Center’s transfer from Evergreen to South Seattle was done by Rick Bender, Al Link, and Jeff Johnson from the Washington State Labor Council.  Many thanks to them for their excellent diplomatic efforts.  They met twice and communicated frequently with both Evergreen President Les Purce and the presidents of South Seattle in the weeks leading up to the legislature’s authorization of the transfer through a budget proviso.  Through these negotiations, Les Purce came to support the idea of the move as a way of positioning the Labor Center to best serve unions and working people in the state.  He authorized the transfer of all state operating funds the Center currently receives from Evergreen, meaning the Center will have some $164,000 per year available to begin the rebuilding process at a new institution.  This will be enough money for two full-time staff:  one director and one labor educator.  We don’t know yet who those people will be because South Seattle will be holding open searches for the two positions, a requirement we hadn’t anticipated.  We have been told that Sarah Laslett and I will be offered interim short-term contracts beginning July 1st while the open searches are conducted.

 

I know many people reading this will be disturbed by this news and concerned that something important will be lost in moving the Labor Center from Evergreen to a more conventional college.  After all, there’s been some important chemistry between Evergreen’s participatory, interdisciplinary educational practices and the popular education model valued by the Labor Center.  In addition, Evergreen’s position at the edge of the educational system, and geographically at the edge of the Puget Sound itself, has encouraged a similar relationship between the Center and labor unions.  It has been argued that being at the edge as a Labor Center has provided some protection for critical thinking by workers, union members, union officers, and staff about the work which needs to be done to revitalize the labor movement.  Those who have valued this marginality may be worried about the Labor Center moving closer to the centers of union power.  Will we lose our ability to offer something valuable to institutions that sometimes get stuck in counterproductive patterns of survival?

 

I understand the spirit that underlies this concern.  However, the reality is that the Labor Center has always been closely connected to unions, even if the unions we’ve worked with have shifted over time.  A core part of the Center’s existence since the beginning has been providing direct educational services to unions and their members.  In addition, we’ve depended on unions and organizations like the Washington State Labor Council to advocate on our behalf with the governor and the legislature and to defend and expand our budgets.  Wanting to strengthen our ties to unions is not counter to the Center’s history, but very much in keeping with it.  It’s also necessary to our continued survival.

 

In terms of providing a space at South Seattle for continued critical reflection about the labor movement, it’s fortunate that a lot of unions have formal connections with the college – everything from the faculty union (AFT Local 1789) and the staff union (WFSE Local 304) to construction unions and manufacturing and health care unions.  That diversity means lots of stimulation to Labor Center staff offering educational programs for the labor movement and the organizations and people who compose it (including those folks not currently organized into unions).  The union diversity on campus is supplemented by the connection between formal organized labor and the community college system.  The Washington State Labor Council has a seat on the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, and unions have representation on the boards for the individual colleges as well.  So the Center won’t be isolated from union allies as everyone in the public sector deals with inadequate budgets in the coming years.

 

Nevertheless, might there still be risks in moving the Labor Center from one institution to another?  Absolutely, there are huge risks.  We’ve already seen that South’s administration is requiring existing staff to reapply for our jobs.  In addition, the college’s initial plan for where we will be placed administratively has us reporting to a business-oriented program, a totally inappropriate choice which we and our Advisory Committee are challenging.  So there’s a risk that no current Labor Center staff will end up at South Seattle, and that whoever staffs the Center will have to quickly take up a struggle for respect and independence.  But with all these challenges I still think the prospects for long-term survival and growth are better at South Seattle than they would have been at Evergreen.  We’ve got a good Advisory Committee that’s already grappling with these issues, the faculty union at the college is keeping a close eye on things, there are many excellent faculty on the campuses of the Seattle Community Colleges who care about labor, and legislators from the area are concerned.  The Labor Center will have to struggle no matter where it is located, so you have to gauge where you think the struggle has the best chance of success and give it your best shot.  By its very geography and institutional relationships with labor, South Seattle is still the place where there’s important union and population density, more union presence on campus, more union locals in the area, and therefore greater possibility for survival.

 

Having said that, I do want to acknowledge our debt to the many, many people at Evergreen who have helped to build up the Center over the years.  This includes former directors and founders Dan Leahy and Helen Lee, who laid a pedagogical and philosophical foundation for the Center that we honor to this day.  It also includes all the staff, students, and volunteers (including members of the Advisory Committee) who have worked with the Center over the years.  During my ten years I’ve been privileged to work with some remarkable people, not only the existing staff (Juan José Bocanegra, Sarah Laslett, and Nina Triffleman) but also the folks who preceded them:  Sue Hirst, Dennis Otterstetter, Lucilene Lira, and, for a brief time, Paul Bigman.  All amazing folks who made the Labor Center a rich place to work, despite the financial austerity we always faced.

 

If the crisis for the Center weren’t so real, and the prospects for survival and expansion on campus so grim, I’d say we wouldn’t have the right to support the  move from Evergreen to South Seattle.  You don’t make a decision like that casually.  However, since we’re meant to be a Labor Center for all of Washington state, and for unions and worker organizations in particular, our most important responsibility is to survive, thrive, and hopefully expand so that we can fulfill this broader mandate.  We’ve been Evergreen’s Labor Center, yes, but more importantly we’ve been Washington’s Labor Center at Evergreen, and we need to remember this distinction even as we acknowledge our roots.  In addition, we don’t expect our origins at Evergreen to be lost in coming years.  Representatives from Evergreen will (hopefully) continue to serve on our Advisory  Committee, the Center may continue to offer the Summer School for Union Women on that campus, and Center staff will be available as consultants (and classroom speakers, etc.) to academic programs.  The details all need to be worked out, but there’s no desire, on my part at least, to wipe out our historical connection with Evergreen.

 

Are there ways you can help us out as we transition to our new home?  We’ll be in touch about opportunities to contribute money once the move has taken place – of course – but in the meantime, I welcome any statement you would like to make about what the Labor Center has meant to you, what you don’t want to see lost, what you value in the way of independence in labor education, and/or what you want the Labor Center to become.  Send your statements to me, and I’ll collect them and if it seems appropriate send copies to union leaders and college administrators with whom we will be working.

 

One final thing to remember – even though we’re moving to a community college in Seattle, we’ll still be a state-wide program.  This we’ve been assured by the South Seattle administration, and is something that is understood by our supporters among Seattle unions.  So please make sure you keep in touch about programs you’d like to see offered in your union and your region.

 

Wish us luck with the move, and if there are ways you can help us with it, please get in touch.

 

In solidarity,

 

Peter Kardas

 

From: "Kardas, Peter" <KardasP@evergreen.edu>
Date: Tue, May 4, 2010

Statement by Evergreen Labor Center Director Peter Kardas on the Labor
Center Move to South Seattle Community College

May 4, 2010

The Governor has signed the state's operating budget, and what was rumor
is now fact: the Labor Center is moving to South Seattle Community
College, effective July 1st, 2010. After 23 years the Labor Center will
no longer have a physical presence at The Evergreen State College. Why is
this happening? Who or what is behind the move? And what are the
prospects that South Seattle will be a good home for the Labor Center?

The main reason that Labor Center staff began a year ago to explore the
idea of a move was the 50% cut to our budget that took effect July 1st,
2009. That cut, which was imposed by the Evergreen administration, came
only two years after the legislature and governor, with the encouragement
of the Washington State Labor Council and many labor unions, doubled our
budget, giving a taste for the first time in the Labor Center's history of
what an adequate amount of funding might look like. The cut also came
with the suggestion that the college might impose further cuts in 2011 to
all public service centers, including the Labor Center, if state revenues
did not pick up. The prospects for holding on to current funding, let
alone returning to our high budget mark or expanding beyond it, seemed
very grim. Therefore, it seemed smart to explore the possibility of
transferring what funds we have left to another institution that might be
more willing to support us for the long haul. And so last summer we
approached the Washington State Labor Council and allies in labor unions
to explore that possibility.

The idea of moving to South Seattle Community College (and the Georgetown
campus in particular) was suggested by a number of folks (including people
who don't live in Seattle!). Why South Seattle? The highest union
density in the state (and therefore the greatest potential demand for
labor education) is in the central Puget Sound region. There are a number
of apprenticeships and other union education programs on the Georgetown
campus, and dozens of unions have their headquarters within a 15 mile
radius of the campus. In addition, labor leaders in that geographic
region have expressed strong support for the Center's move to Georgetown.
So has the faculty union on campus, as have legislators with union
backgrounds from the region. In other words, there's lots of interest in
the move to South, lots of support from key players, lots of need for
labor education in that geographical area - and therefore, lots of reasons
to think that the move will be good for the Labor Center's fundamental
mission of "providing direct educational and research services to labor
unions and worker-centered organizations."

The work of negotiating the Center's transfer from Evergreen to South
Seattle was done by Rick Bender, Al Link, and Jeff Johnson from the
Washington State Labor Council. Many thanks to them for their excellent
diplomatic efforts. They met twice and communicated frequently with both
Evergreen President Les Purce and the presidents of South Seattle in the
weeks leading up to the legislature's authorization of the transfer
through a budget proviso. Through these negotiations, Les Purce came to
support the idea of the move as a way of positioning the Labor Center to
best serve unions and working people in the state. He authorized the
transfer of all state operating funds the Center currently receives from
Evergreen, meaning the Center will have some $164,000 per year available
to begin the rebuilding process at a new institution. This will be enough
money for two full-time staff: one director and one labor educator. We
don't know yet who those people will be because South Seattle will be
holding open searches for the two positions, a requirement we hadn't
anticipated. We have been told that Sarah Laslett and I will be offered
interim short-term contracts beginning July 1st while the open searches
are conducted.

I know many people reading this will be disturbed by this news and
concerned that something important will be lost in moving the Labor Center
from Evergreen to a more conventional college. After all, there's been
some important chemistry between Evergreen's participatory,
interdisciplinary educational practices and the popular education model
valued by the Labor Center. In addition, Evergreen's position at the edge
of the educational system, and geographically at the edge of the Puget
Sound itself, has encouraged a similar relationship between the Center and
labor unions. It has been argued that being at the edge as a Labor Center
has provided some protection for critical thinking by workers, union
members, union officers, and staff about the work which needs to be done
to revitalize the labor movement. Those who have valued this marginality
may be worried about the Labor Center moving closer to the centers of
union power. Will we lose our ability to offer something valuable to
institutions that sometimes get stuck in counterproductive patterns of
survival?

I understand the spirit that underlies this concern. However, the reality
is that the Labor Center has always been closely connected to unions, even
if the unions we've worked with have shifted over time. A core part of
the Center's existence since the beginning has been providing direct
educational services to unions and their members. In addition, we've
depended on unions and organizations like the Washington State Labor
Council to advocate on our behalf with the governor and the legislature
and to defend and expand our budgets. Wanting to strengthen our ties to
unions is not counter to the Center's history, but very much in keeping
with it. It's also necessary to our continued survival.

In terms of providing a space at South Seattle for continued critical
reflection about the labor movement, it's fortunate that a lot of unions
have formal connections with the college - everything from the faculty
union (AFT Local 1789) and the staff union (WFSE Local 304) to
construction unions and manufacturing and health care unions. That
diversity means lots of stimulation to Labor Center staff offering
educational programs for the labor movement and the organizations and
people who compose it (including those folks not currently organized into
unions). The union diversity on campus is supplemented by the connection
between formal organized labor and the community college system. The
Washington State Labor Council has a seat on the State Board for Community
and Technical Colleges, and unions have representation on the boards for
the individual colleges as well. So the Center won't be isolated from
union allies as everyone in the public sector deals with inadequate
budgets in the coming years.

Nevertheless, might there still be risks in moving the Labor Center from
one institution to another? Absolutely, there are huge risks. We've
already seen that South's administration is requiring existing staff to
reapply for our jobs. In addition, the college's initial plan for where
we will be placed administratively has us reporting to a business-oriented
program, a totally inappropriate choice which we and our Advisory
Committee are challenging. So there's a risk that no current Labor Center
staff will end up at South Seattle, and that whoever staffs the Center
will have to quickly take up a struggle for respect and independence. But
with all these challenges I still think the prospects for long-term
survival and growth are better at South Seattle than they would have been
at Evergreen. We've got a good Advisory Committee that's already
grappling with these issues, the faculty union at the college is keeping a
close eye on things, there are many excellent faculty on the campuses of
the Seattle Community Colleges who care about labor, and legislators from
the area are concerned. The Labor Center will have to struggle no matter
where it is located, so you have to gauge where you think the struggle has
the best chance of success and give it your best shot. By its very
geography and institutional relationships with labor, South Seattle is
still the place where there's important union and population density, more
union presence on campus, more union locals in the area, and therefore
greater possibility for survival.

Having said that, I do want to acknowledge our debt to the many, many
people at Evergreen who have helped to build up the Center over the years.
This includes former directors and founders Dan Leahy and Helen Lee, who
laid a pedagogical and philosophical foundation for the Center that we
honor to this day. It also includes all the staff, students, and
volunteers (including members of the Advisory Committee) who have worked
with the Center over the years. During my ten years I've been privileged
to work with some remarkable people, not only the existing staff (Juan
José Bocanegra, Sarah Laslett, and Nina Triffleman) but also the folks who
preceded them: Sue Hirst, Dennis Otterstetter, Lucilene Lira, and, for a
brief time, Paul Bigman. All amazing folks who made the Labor Center a
rich place to work, despite the financial austerity we always faced.

If the crisis for the Center weren't so real, and the prospects for
survival and expansion on campus so grim, I'd say we wouldn't have the
right to support the move from Evergreen to South Seattle. You don't
make a decision like that casually. However, since we're meant to be a
Labor Center for all of Washington state, and for unions and worker
organizations in particular, our most important responsibility is to
survive, thrive, and hopefully expand so that we can fulfill this broader
mandate. We've been Evergreen's Labor Center, yes, but more importantly
we've been Washington's Labor Center at Evergreen, and we need to remember
this distinction even as we acknowledge our roots. In addition, we don't
expect our origins at Evergreen to be lost in coming years.
Representatives from Evergreen will (hopefully) continue to serve on our
Advisory Committee, the Center may continue to offer the Summer School
for Union Women on that campus, and Center staff will be available as
consultants (and classroom speakers, etc.) to academic programs. The
details all need to be worked out, but there's no desire, on my part at
least, to wipe out our historical connection with Evergreen.

Are there ways you can help us out as we transition to our new home?
We'll be in touch about opportunities to contribute money once the move
has taken place - of course - but in the meantime, I welcome any statement
you would like to make about what the Labor Center has meant to you, what
you don't want to see lost, what you value in the way of independence in
labor education, and/or what you want the Labor Center to become. Send
your statements to me, and I'll collect them and if it seems appropriate
send copies to union leaders and college administrators with whom we will
be working.

One final thing to remember - even though we're moving to a community
college in Seattle, we'll still be a state-wide program. This we've been
assured by the South Seattle administration, and is something that is
understood by our supporters among Seattle unions. So please make sure
you keep in touch about programs you'd like to see offered in your union
and your region.

Wish us luck with the move, and if there are ways you can help us with it,
please get in touch.

In solidarity,

Peter Kardas

No comments: