Collective Bargaining Rights for Resident Advisors
This paper examines collective bargaining rights for university resident advisors (RAs), community development advisors (CDAs), and teaching assistants (TAs). It analyzes how state labor relations boards and the National Labor Relations Board have interpreted employee status for these groups, tracing shifts from liberal to conservative rulings and back. The paper addresses the working conditions driving RA unionization efforts, the concerns of those opposed, and the broader question of how union density affects university attitudes toward organized labor. Drawing on the NLRA's definition of "employee," the paper ultimately argues that RAs and CDAs are entitled to collective bargaining protections, and that recognizing this status benefits both workers and institutional accountability.
- Labor Law and the Right to Unionize: State law supports RA unionization and collective bargaining
- Teaching Assistants: Workers or Students?: NLRB rulings on TA employee status have shifted over time
- University Recognition of Collective Bargaining Rights: Union density shapes university attitudes toward organized labor
- Factors Driving RA Unionization: Poor conditions and high turnover fueled RA union support
- Concerns of RAs Opposed to Unionization: Unionization risks retribution, outsourcing, and campus division
- NLRA Definition and Employee Classification: NLRA text supports classifying RAs as protected employees
- The LRC Decision on RAs and CDAs: LRC ruling grants RAs and CDAs collective bargaining rights
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds each argument in specific legal sources, including direct quotations from the NLRA and NLRB rulings, lending authority to the analysis.
- Presents multiple perspectives — pro-union, anti-union, and institutional — before arriving at a reasoned conclusion, demonstrating balanced engagement with the topic.
- Uses concrete data, such as the 36.0% university unionization rate from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, to support comparative claims about union density and institutional attitudes.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates statutory interpretation as an analytical tool. By quoting the NLRA's definition of "employee" directly and then applying it systematically to the case of RAs and CDAs, the author shows how legal text can be used as evidence in an argument rather than mere background context. This technique — close reading of primary legal sources to support a policy position — is central to labor law and employment studies writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized as a numbered question-and-answer response, with each section addressing a discrete aspect of the collective bargaining issue: legal framework, classification disputes, institutional attitudes, worker motivations, opposition concerns, statutory definitions, and a final evaluative judgment. This structure reflects a law or labor relations course assignment format, moving logically from description and analysis toward a normative conclusion in the final section.
Labor Law and the Right to Unionize
Labor laws are encouraging unionization in the university context. The state Labor Relations Board determined that resident advisors (RAs) have the right to form and join a union, and that they are entitled to collective bargaining. At the same time, the university is recognizing the union as the legitimate representative for the RAs.
These factors illustrate how the law is encouraging unionization by establishing that this kind of organization is legitimate. Despite the fact that RAs may also be students, they are entitled to greater protections under the law. As a result, a secret ballot can be conducted and the students can organize. This determination made the process much easier, in part because a petition from the university questioning the lawfulness of the union was dismissed.
Moreover, the United Auto Workers (UAW) has been actively involved in working with and representing other employees in similar contexts. These elements illustrate how the law is favorable toward unions by recognizing an individual's right to join these organizations.
The position taken by the state is more liberal, including students among those entitled to collective bargaining rights. This interpretation is one indication that state laws are designed to encourage workers — including student-employees — to join a union and seek its assistance. The fact that these protections were readily extended to other categories of university employees further underscores this support. Over time, this trend has resulted in unions gaining greater presence and influence inside the university workplace.
Teaching Assistants: Workers or Students?
The classification of teaching assistants (TAs) is somewhat ambiguous, owing to conflicting rulings from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on whether these individuals are considered students or workers. In the 1970s, the Board ruled that TAs are workers and therefore entitled to collective bargaining rights. This ruling reflected the Board's predominantly Democratic composition at the time and its more liberal interpretation of the law (Greenhouse, 2004).
For a number of schools, this established a precedent that allowed TAs to organize effectively. It led to various universities recognizing TAs as workers and acknowledging their rights accordingly. However, as time went by, many schools challenged this definition and petitioned the NLRB for a new interpretation of these guidelines (Greenhouse, 2004).
In 2004, the Board reversed its previous decision and determined that TAs are not workers but students, and therefore not entitled to collective bargaining rights under the law. After issuing the ruling, the Board stated: "The previous decision in the N.Y.U. case overturned over 30 years of determinations by the National Labor Relations Board on whether graduate students who worked as teaching and research assistants were students or employees. And it threatened the traditional relationship between colleges and their graduate student assistants" (Greenhouse, 2004).
This reversal illustrates how TAs are considered workers under more liberal interpretations of labor law, yet the hours they devote and their importance to university operations suggest they function as paid employees. They contribute a significant number of hours performing vital functions for the institution and its faculty (Greenhouse, 2004).
University Recognition of Collective Bargaining Rights
An effective argument can be made that the university implicitly recognizes employee collective bargaining rights. By allowing other groups to fall into the protected category, the university signals that it accepts these provisions in principle. The disputes surrounding TAs and graduate students, however, illustrate that the university does not equally recognize this particular group, their contributions, or the additional demands placed upon them.
Universities with high union density rates are more likely to take an accepting approach toward unions, because organized labor is dominant at these schools relative to other institutions. For example, the Bureau of Labor Statistics determined that most universities have a unionization rate of 36.0% nationally — considerably higher than the private sector rate of 9.9% ("Economic News Release," 2012).
At schools with greater levels of union support, there tend to be more liberal institutional attitudes toward organized labor, simply because unions are so dominant that the university must accommodate their practices. Over time, this means that administrators at such schools are more willing to allow unions to expand and protect additional segments of the workforce.
By contrast, schools with lower numbers of unionized employees tend to be less cooperative and supportive. Their administrations believe that collective bargaining laws and liberal interpretations are undermining their ability to control costs and maintain quality. These administrations seek to reduce union influence and are opposed to any expansion of collective bargaining rights.
References
Economic News Release. (2012). BLS. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm
Greenhouse, S. (2004). Labor Board. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/16/education/16union.html
National Labor Relations Act. (2012). NLRB. Retrieved from
Olafson, S. (2011). Oklahoma set to repeal collective bargaining rights. Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/19/us-unions-oklahoma-idUSTRE73I6EE20110419
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.