Part-time employment in the public sector is often viewed as a temporary or supplementary option for individuals looking to enter the workforce or earn extra income. However, the reality for California’s 36,000 part-time community college professors paints a different picture. These educators face unique challenges and limitations that defy common assumptions about part-time work in the public sector.
One of the most striking differences for part-time college instructors is the lack of a clear path to full-time employment. Unlike other professions where part-time roles can lead to full-time positions, community college instructors must secure a rare full-time tenure track position to transition from part-time status. This leaves many part-time instructors feeling like “apprentices to nowhere,” as they may work for decades without the opportunity for advancement.
Additionally, part-time instructors in California face disparities in pay and benefits compared to their full-time counterparts. While full-time instructors receive state-paid health insurance, only a small percentage of part-timers have access to this benefit. Part-time instructor salaries are not pro-rated based on full-time rates, but rather calculated on a separate scale that amounts to about 50-60% of the full-time rate. This, combined with a workload cap limiting part-time instructors to 67% of full-time hours, results in significantly lower annual incomes for part-time faculty.
Surveys conducted by the American Federation of Teachers have revealed that approximately 25% of part-time community college faculty nationwide fall below the federal poverty line. This highlights the financial challenges faced by part-time instructors who are essential to the functioning of community colleges but do not receive equitable compensation or benefits.
The two-tier workplace created by the distinction between full-time and part-time instructors can be likened to a caste system. Both groups hold the same credentials, provide the same educational value to students, and are subject to the same tuition rates. However, full-time instructors have more flexibility in terms of workload and course selection, often displacing part-time instructors when they choose to teach overtime.
Efforts to address the inequities faced by part-time instructors, such as Assembly Bill 2277, have been met with mixed reactions. While raising the part-time workload restriction could potentially increase income for some instructors, it does not address the fundamental issue of limited opportunities for part-timers. Proposed amendments to the bill, such as removing the workload cap entirely and banning full-time instructors from teaching overtime, could provide more meaningful improvements for part-time faculty.
However, opposition to these changes may come from faculty unions and full-time instructors who benefit from the current system. The dominance of full-timers in faculty unions has led to a focus on tenured faculty, resulting in collective bargaining agreements that prioritize full-time working conditions over those of part-time instructors. This conflict of interest underscores the need for systemic changes to create a more equitable environment for all college instructors.
In conclusion, the challenges faced by part-time community college professors in California highlight the need for reform in the public sector. By addressing issues such as limited opportunities for advancement, disparities in pay and benefits, and the two-tier workplace dynamic, lawmakers and faculty unions can work towards creating a more fair and inclusive environment for all educators. Abolishing involuntary part-time work restrictions and allowing part-time instructors to work full-time would be a significant step towards achieving this goal.
