Wednesday, August 12, 2009


Another Successful Prediction

They say that a prophet is never appreciated in his own country. That said, this article from IHE certainly rang a bell. Back in 2006, I wrote

[T]here’s a hefty chunk of change to be made for some enterprising type who sets up shop in an area with lots of colleges and establishes a temp agency for adjuncts. “I need a cultural anthropologist, stat!” Anybody who has ever chaired a department with significant numbers of adjuncts knows that there’s always that one last section to staff two days before the semester begins, it’s full of students, and absolutely nobody can take it. A temp agency for adjuncts – call it Kelly Profs – could be the number a harried chair could call. “Hello, Kelly Profs? I need three daytime sections of freshman comp covered, starting Tuesday. No problem? Wow! Thanks,Kelly Profs!” Dollars to donuts, someone does this in the next five years. Hell, if I had the entrepreneurial zeal and absolutely no soul, I’d do it myself.

and so it has come to pass. It even matched my timeline! (Remember, as Easterbrook likes to say, all predictions guaranteed or your money back. Reading the blog is free, so...)

Actually, the reality is somewhat less elegant, but they've still got two years (by my original timeline) to get it right. According to the article, Kirtland Community College in Michigan has come up with an adjunct-laundering arrangement with a temp agency in order to save money on benefits. The college recruits and interviews prospective adjuncts, whom it then refers to the temp agency. The temp agency is the employer of record, taking care of social security taxes and suchlike, while assigning the adjuncts to KCC as a worksite. That way, KCC is relieved of the obligation of paying contributions to the adjuncts' state retirement fund.

The arrangement as currently designed is silly, and perfect lawsuit bait. By doing the recruiting and interviewing, KCC is acting like an employer. The temp agency is acting as little more than a payroll department. But if KCC allowed the temp agency to do the recruiting and interviewing, I could see the arrangement holding up in court. In other words, if it functioned less like a fig leaf and more like Kelly Profs, it would probably succeed.

The added incentive to go the Kelly Profs route, as detailed in my initial post, is that it would allow the temp agency to function as a placement center. Prospective adjuncts could apply and interview in one place, and thereby cover multiple colleges at once. Harried department chairs would have a single number to call when they need people, thereby saving time and energy. And a single agency doing all that screening could get around the HR headaches of umpteen zillion separate chairs winging it on hiring practices, with varying levels of legal acumen.

A certain demystifying of the employment relationship could be weirdly healthy. Having a central coordinator could make it easier for freeway flyers to get logistically possible schedules. And importing a clearly mercenary model could help dispel the false hope that actually contributes to so much bitterness and exploitation.

Oddly enough, a Kelly Profs style temp agency would make a wonderful target for unionization. Collecting all those freeway flyers in one convenient location would benefit not only department chairs, but union organizers. In a perverse way, following the logic of temp work all the way out could actually improve the conditions of temp work. At least, it would until the next temp agency came along.

(Back in the 90's, during one of my piece-together-a-living moments, I did some temp work. I recall reading back then that the unique evil of temp agencies is that they make workers compete against themselves. If you sign up as a temp with two different agencies, hoping to maximize your opportunities, you allow two agencies to try to underbid each other on your behalf. “We'll pimp him out for ten bucks an hour!” “We'll do nine!” “Eight!” Bleah.)

In the short run, the KCC arrangement is silly. It's too clearly a fig leaf, and unlikely to stand up to legal challenge. But taking it to the next level would be both easy and (probably) legal. The cost savings could still be there, at least until the union organizers make serious headway, and the logistical issues are not to be sneezed at. I could even imagine the temp agencies contracting with 'content experts' (that is, full-time faculty) to help develop rubrics (that is, to 'consult') with which to evaluate prospective new temps. Honestly, the leap involved is tiny, and the economic logic is non-trivial.

Once a system starts following its own logic, it tends to keep going. Although the particulars will vary, I'd wager that this won't be the last time we see something like this. It's just too predictable.

I can see the appeal of a wholesale adjunct temp agency. Really, the "interview" questions that count could be replaced with a survey that says. "do you have an MA from an actual program" and "can you teach X at Y time" -- the other answers are just window dressing.

Of course, the reason this won't happen is that the individual colleges like the illusion/power to control the assignments. Also, without the illusion that good adjuncting leads to tenure, why would they do it?
I think you're right that the temp agency would need to do some interviewing for this not to be a huge can of worms, but it's important to note that even if the temp agency did so, it would not preclude universities from doing an interview before hiring on the temp. This was the norm for any long-term temp assignment I took (I temped periodically throughout college and grad school). In other words, I'd been taken on as an employee of the temp service, but if I wanted anything more than day receptionist/filing gigs (for close to minimum wage) I typically had to go into the business that I would temp for and have an interview before I got the assignment. In other words, the business still had control over whether I was appropriate for their needs. These were for assignments ranging from 1 month to 9 months.
"Also, without the illusion that good adjuncting leads to tenure, why would they do it?"

I would; I'm adjuncting while home with a baby, to make a little extra money and to make periodic visits to grown-up world while keeping my hand in at something I enjoy. I adjunct at one local college, but I'd be happy to adjunct at any of the several others nearby, I just have no motivation or reason to put out resumes at this time.

If there were a local pool and someone called and said, "Quick, we need a philo 101 filled!" I could probably pick it up and I'd enjoy the variety.
I think this temp agency really has it good. Think about it: They have an expert (the community college) vetting their employees for them. Now, unless they have an exclusive relationship with the community college, to ONLY use those people for them, they are building a bull-pen of adjuncts that they can then "sell" to any other businesses that might have a need in the area.

Not just colleges, either. Heck, if you hire adjunct english PhDs who have technical writing skills, then companies in the area with that requirement need call that firm.

And of course, they must maintain non-exclusivity so that they can maintain what is, for now, a facade of being a provider and not simply " little more than a payroll department."
It's an interesting concept. Our cc tried this with the tutors. But there was such a big uproar that they had to back off. It looks very bad in the public relations department if you contract out jobs that effect the academic performance of your students for which you pay very little and don't provide benefits. It garnered a lot of publicity in the local press.

In our area, adjuncts are hired by the department. In fact, at our cc which has 5 campuses, you are hired by the department at one specific campus.

So how would a department chair react when the temp agency says, "Sorry but that particular instructor is not available to teach that section at that time. We can offer you Mr. X instead." But if Mr. X has never been ok'd by that particular department chair, they would have to start a whole new process of interviews. And that department then takes the original instructor off their list. `
I'm with Eyebrows. I'd love it if there were a temp agency like this around here. There are over 50 colleges in about 10-15 mile area. I'd like to adjunct on occasion, but I'm not going to comb through every college's website to see who's hiring (not all of them post the jobs in central locations like the Chronicle or even the newspaper). I'm not interested in tenure. I'm interested in teaching.
DD wrote:

"That way, KCC is relieved of the obligation of paying contributions to the adjuncts' state retirement fund."

Actually, this is another good point, from the point of view of the adjuncts, for having this "temp agency."

If they work for this company, and this company has as part of it's fee structure, the inclusion of taxes and retirement fund investments, then the adjuncts have it all in one account, with one firm. And it remains a variable cost for service paid only when the CC needs it.
One thing many people missed is that the problem up there in the Great White North is that adjuncts are eligible for retirement benefits. That cost is what is driving this move by the college.

It could even be good for the adjuncts if they don't expect to get vested in the state retirement system. Some numbers are in the IHE comment section for that story.

However, this particular case is not even close to fitting your model if you know where this place is located! Look here (click) for an interactive map. Hint: It is not far from the middle of nowhere. I can't imagine where they find adjuncts.

You would be flying over snowy 2-lane roads as well as freeways to commute between it and any other colleges, but it is a great area to retire while teaching a few classes when not out snowmobiling or ice fishing. (And a retiree would not want to be paying into the state retirement system.)
What you describe though is exactly what goes on with tech contractors all the time. You give your resume to the contractor, they run it by the company and the company will talk with you to see if you'd be a fit. Then you're hired on through the contractor, and yes they're a payroll department/HR essentially at that point, your benefits are through them, then at some point in time if the company wants to keep you and can find the money they make you an offer. Then the contractor goes out and finds more folks.
@mwheatley: Yep, I'm familiar with that model, since my husband's in the IT field and has been body-shopped that way many times. As Eyebrows and Laura mention, it'd probably be pretty appealing for good teachers looking for work on the side, too.

The biggest barrier to Kelly Profs, IMO, is going to be the mystique of academia. Much of the marketing surrounding college education hinges on the dedication and prestige of the faculty. Now, all of us here know that the reality on the ground is very different, with a majority of all classes being taught by people who are not affiliated with the university in that sense. Kelly Profs takes the skunk of that reality and dumps it right into the front parlor. Try to justify that $50K tuition when the parents find out that Junior's English teacher was hired through a temp agency.
The main reason I think this isn't being done is because of the various legal messes that have come about with hiring the same temp for years at a time without making them an actual employee. Wikipedia has an article on this :

Of course, some of those legal issues could still come into play with hiring the same adjunct every year even without an agency...I wonder if there is any higher ed caselaw in this area? The practice of long-term adjuncting is so widespread you'd think that someone would have seen the analogues to permatemps and tried a similar lawsuit by now, but I've never heard of one.
A modest proposal to DD: By the same logic of short-term efficiency and hiring flexibility, why not temp hire all the administrative positions at your college? Now we're talking salary savings!

(Hint: any argument against the above proposal--e.g., lack of institutional stability--is also an argument against the faux-efficiency of temping out adjunct faculty.)
Just popping in to say 'Nice Job!' from the other 'Dean' on the internet -
Anything would be better than the system we have now! Before returning to school I worked for a temp agency, where I made an actual living wage (!) and was eligible for benefits after working for them for a reasonable amount of time. That is looking really, really good right now.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?