Finally, some justice for Rosalind Franklin?

In an earlier post, I criticized my Biochemistry textbook for its failure to mention Rosalind Franklin as a key player in the discovery of the DNA double helix. My A&P textbook is Anatomy & Physiology: The Unity of Form and Function, by Saladin, Fifth edition, Copyright 2010. Maybe it is a sign of the times. I am including their section on Franklin below, as it is the first time I’ve seen a science textbook give credit where credit is due:

Discovery of the Double Helix

Credit for determining the double-helical structure of DNA has gone mainly to James Watson and Francis Crick. The events surrounding their discovery form one of the most dramatic stories of modern science—the subject of many books and at least one movie. When Watson and Crick came to share a laboratory at Cambridge University in 1951, both had barely begun their careers. Watson, age 23, had just completed his Ph.D. in the United States, and Crick, 11 years older, was a doctoral candidate in England. Yet the two were about to become the most famous molecular biologists of the twentieth century, and the discovery that won them such acclaim came without a single laboratory experiment of their own.

Others were fervently at work on DNA, including Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins at King’s College in London. Using a technique called X-ray diffraction, Franklin had determined that DNA had a repetitious helical structure with sugar and phosphate on the outside of the helix. Without her permission, Wilkins showed one of Franklin’s best X-ray photographs to Watson. Watson said, “The instant I saw the picture my mouth fell open and my pulse began to race.” It provided a flash of insight that allowed the Watson and Crick team to beat Franklin to the goal. They were quickly able to piece together a scale model from cardboard and sheet metal that fully accounted for the known geometry of DNA. They rushed a paper into print in 1953 describing the double helix, barely mentioning the importance of Franklin’s 2 years of painstaking X-ray diffraction work in unlocking the mystery of life’s most important molecule. Franklin published her findings in a separate paper back to back with theirs.

For this discovery, Watson, Crick, and Wilkins shared the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1962. Nobel Prizes are awarded only to the living, and in the final irony of her career, Rosalind Franklin had died in 1958, at the age of 37, of a cancer possibly induced by the X-rays that were her window on DNA architecture.

Also included are pictures of Rosalind Franklin, one of her X-ray photographs, and Watson and Crick with their model of the double helix.

Be an Advocate for Women’s Equity in Higher Education: Part 4

Part 4, with names changed...

The chair of the Status of Women says, “The Commission has historically been concerned with issues of fairness and giving a voice to those who don’t have one. I’m afraid that Limited Term Employees have no Norma Rae to rally them.”

In 2006, after scrutiny about its long term use of approximately 2,500 limited term employees, UW-Madison implemented an LTE reform plan: use LTE employment only for seasonal or irregular functions, set wages for LTE appointments at or above the living wage defined by the City of Madison as 110 percent of federal poverty rate for a family of four, and begin a five-year plan to convert existing LTE positions that are not seasonal or irregular to permanent status.

According to the Director of Classified Human Resources at UW-Madison, they currently have 1600 LTE appointments. According to the March 2009 report of the advisory committee, 288 of these positions are identified for conversion to permanent status (the rest are seasonal or irregular positions). Since the LTE reform plan was implemented in October of 2006, 50 LTE positions have been converted to permanent status, creating the equivalent of 36.4 new FTE positions. In addition, the committee reports that 89% of LTEs are now paid at or above the living wage of $10.92 per hour.

When asked whether LTEs have any rights, our HR representative says it depends on what you mean by rights. “In terms of progression and transfer, LTEs have no rights,” she says. But she cites a sexual harassment situation as an example where LTEs have the same rights any employee has. She adds that LTEs are told about their limited rights when they are hired. “When an LTE starts they sign documents saying they don’t have the rights or benefits that regular, permanent employees have,” she says.

For some, working as an LTE can be a stepping stone into permanent state employment, which guarantees higher wages, better benefits, and union representation. Karen is the advocacy model needed to promote “limited term” workers into permanent positions throughout the UW-System. Gaining equal rights for Wisconsin Women working in “limited term” positions in Higher Education is critical to women’s economic success in Wisconsin. We must be the ultimate model for our own liberal education learning goals –for students to “develop and use skills for promoting equity, diversity, and inclusivity in civic and professional contexts.”

Karen—who made so many changes for her limited term employees—currently serves on the Chancellor’s Diversity Committee and contends that we can all inspire positive change. “I look at my circle of influence and say ‘what can I do?’” she says. “When I became a manager—I could do something. That’s what we have to do with diversity. Look at ourselves as one person making a difference.”

Be an Advocate for Women’s Equity in Higher Education: Part 3

Part 3 with names changed...

My colleagues and I worked many years as LTEs before we were able to apply and compete for our own permanent positions. If not for our manager, Karen, who crusaded to get equal rights for her LTEs, I am confident that we would all still be “limited term.”

In 1976, Karen took a job doing data entry for the Admissions office. “I spent eight hours a day typing in information off the application into a computer terminal,” she says. Less than four years later, she was promoted to the Registrar’s office. While working full-time, Karen earned a Bachelor’s degree in Management Information Systems and a Master’s of Business Administration. Today she is the Associate Director of the IT department.

Karen's department has successfully converted all of their long-term limited term employees to permanent state employees. Converting LTEs to full time equivalencies (FTEs), or permanent positions, is not impossible, but it does require challenging the status quo. Karen converted available FTEs, from retirements and position vacancies, into permanent positions that long term LTEs could interview and compete for. Karen found support from her department director. “He knows you have to treat people well, build up a staff that cares, to get good performance,” Karen says. Karen also gathered support from other department managers. “I just said we would make do with less people, or cut services. I had to convince the other managers that our group would take on more if we could have the FTE.”

Karen says the problem occurs when there is money available to fund a position, but no FTE, which is set by the state. For example, Student Senate wanted my position and funded it, and so it remained a limited term position.

Our Human Resources representative says this model would be different for other position classifications. For example, for a University Services Associate position to be converted to a permanent position, it would first have to be posted for any permanent employee in the UW System to transfer into. If no one transfers into the position, the interview process begins. The interview candidates are selected based on their Civil Service exam scores. So it’s possible that the LTE wouldn’t be selected to interview and compete for the permanent position. Once hired as an LTE, it is very hard to become a permanent worker.

Our University Equity, Diversity, and Inclusiveness (EDI) fellow says that to date, EDI has been focused on UW System student-centered equity initiatives (e.g., the Equity Scorecard), but he hopes there is a lot we can do with LTE equity at the campus level. “This is a flawed system that we have routinely supported,” he says. “The system has created, in some cases, second class citizens within their own departments.”

He adds that we have only just begun to have the necessary conversations about LTE equity issues, but that staff equity relates to student success, which we are all responsible for. “With the way we do business now, diversity, equity, and inclusiveness should be engaged in the service of student success at every level…everyone is responsible for student success.”

Be an Advocate for Women’s Equity in Higher Education: Part 2

Part 2 with names changed...

According to a University of Wisconsin Press Release, the definition of LTE appointments is for UW System campus units to carry out short term or seasonal work. One LTE position is limited to no more than 1,043 hours, or six months, of full-time work per year. However, an individual may hold one or two LTE positions, resulting in ongoing part-time or full-time work.

Our University currently has 144 limited term employees, according to our Human Resources representative, who also says that about fifty percent of these LTEs have two positions, meaning the number of LTE positions is likely around 200. This constitutes about 27 percent of all University staff (classified staff and LTEs), or 13 percent of all University employees.

Many in “limited term” positions are working long term without receiving the benefits that permanent state employees receive. In a May 2009 survey of xxxx’s LTEs, 24% reported working less than a year, 22% reported 1-2 years, 14% reported 3-4 years, 11% reported 5-6 years, and 29% reported six years or more. The average length of “limited term” employment was 11.6 years.

Survey respondents represented a variety of positions, such as custodial, clerical, police, early childhood education, marketing, communications, event planning, and technology support. In addition, 84% were female (72% of all current LTEs at our University are female), 26% reported they are the sole provider for their families, and 59% had a baccalaureate degree or higher.

LTEs qualify for minimal benefits, depending on how many positions they have and the number of hours they work. LTEs qualify for the Wisconsin Retirement System (WRS) when they are expected to work at least 600 hours within a 12-month period. Once eligible for WRS, LTEs become eligible for health insurance coverage, and have the option of paying the full premiums for a variety of other benefits, such as supplemental dental and income continuation insurance. Some of these benefits are explained below.

LTEs are paid a minimum of 20% less than permanent workers for doing the same work. According to the LTE Handbook, LTEs start at 20% less than the minimum rate for the Civil Service position classification, with wage increases up to the minimum rate for that Civil Service position classification. This minimum rate is the most an LTE can ever earn, while a permanent employee in the same position classification can earn up to the maximum rate plus receive wage increases as negotiated by union contracts.

To become a permanent state employee, I had to interview and compete with others, including permanent state employees, for the position I had worked in for three years. My wages increased $5.51 per hour—over $200 more per week—for doing the same work, along with annual wage increases as negotiated by union contracts, vacation, sick leave, personal and legal holidays. However, in some ways, my LTE service doesn’t count. An employee’s seniority date is the original date of employment as a permanent employee. Although I’ve worked for the University for five years (3 years LTE and 2 years permanent), I earn vacation benefits at the rate of a two year employee—a difference that amounts to 32 hours/year of vacation time.

Treatment of LTEs, in terms of wages and performance, varies widely. Thirty-seven percent of survey respondents indicated they receive annual performance evaluations from their managers, and 41 percent indicated they do not; 21 percent indicated they receive annual wage increases, and 45 percent indicated they do not. In my three years as an LTE, I was given annual performance reviews and received two fifty cent raises.

In this difficult time of budget cuts, the workload only increases without any reward for limited term employees. One person wrote on the survey, “My boss has continued to give me more on my plate, and I have kept up with his demands. All the while staying at the same pay for 6 years.” Another wrote, “I've worked as an LTE for 9 years now. What does LTE stand for? Limited Term Employee. They are taking advantage of LTEs by not giving them vacation, sick days, paid holidays and personal days.”

One LTE wrote, “I think it's hard for a university to state it's concerned about equity when they essentially create second-class citizens within its own workforce…being an LTE can make you feel worthless; no matter what you do, or how well you do your job, there are no promotions or rewards…Your heart breaks when you resent your child for being sick, because it's another day without pay.”

The Big Old Machine

I just got off the phone with the director of Human Resources. She feels that my article about higher education’s use of limited term employees (LTEs) in long term positions, for low wages and few benefits, is extremely negative and would have a detrimental effect on LTEs. In fact, she said she “panicked” when she read it. The final article is much different than my earlier post, and has not yet been published anywhere. At this point I don’t know if it will be…

In reflecting on my past ten years of work experience, I now view corporate software development as an animal, like a sleek, fast leopard, or a fox—small, yet cunning, sly, and powerful. In the end, looking out ultimately for itself. This is why I left. I thought higher education would be different. I thought I would be happier. And as long as I was ignorant about the inner workings, I was. After five years, I now see higher education as a big, old, archaic machine, professing to teach the values of liberal education and to promote equity and diversity, yet clinging to ancient philosophies about employment, which result in keeping those who have the fewest rights silent and in their places. Perhaps I will be proven wrong. My article has the support of several committees and is being circulated to the higher ups…

Hopefully I will not get laid off tomorrow…

I do not intend for this article to harm anyone; however, I do feel that this is a serious social equity issue that needs to be better understood in our academic community, and perhaps even by a general audience.

Here are some things the HR director said, and which reflect a common attitude among management: people take these jobs knowing what they’re getting in to, this is the system we’re stuck with, these people sign statements of their limited rights when they start working here…ok, all of which might be fine, if you were truly using LTEs to do short term work, like seasonal or special projects. But when you’re using them to do the same work that permanent state employees do, work that is not limited term, denying them equal wages and benefits IS A PROBLEM.

The whole experience of writing this article—the fear and reluctance of many schools to even talk about this issue—is destroying any remaining belief I have in this institution actually practicing and promoting the liberal education values it professes to teach.

A few hours after my conversation with the HR director I realized why I was so surprised. I wasn’t expecting a positive reaction. But I was expecting corrections. Like you got this number wrong or this fact is not actually true. But there were no corrections. Just her vague, high level statements attempting to instill fear.

I was educated by this institution…two degrees and many thousands of dollars. More and more, the words of a wise friend come to mind: “You cannot educate people to be free thinkers and then penalize them when they question the system.”