Interview with Karen Gorder

Karen Gorder (#45) Transcript

LS: This is an interview with Karen Gorder, a TA in the French Department. The date is March 7th, 1977. My name is Laura Smail.

KG: My name is Karen Gorder. I'm from Bismarck, North Dakota and did my undergraduate work at a private Lutheran university called Concordia College in Moorhead, Minnesota. And basically, when I started out at Concordia, I decided that I wanted to go into French. I'd been interested at, in it in high school, and I decided to pursue it. And at Concordia, I earned a BA in French with a minor in Spanish. And at that time, there was a program set up for an 00:01:00assistantship. So I won that, and thereby, I spent about six months in, at the Sorbonne studying, and I came back to teach a year kind of as an undergrad assistant. I was finishing my undergrad degree, and --

LS: At Concordia?

KG: At Concordia, uh-hum. And then I was teaching the beginning level college courses at the same time. And although I was certified to teach in a high school, I decided that at that point in time, I really wasn't interested in doing it, and I decided to go to grad school. And I remember that the person who was in charge of the placement bureau tried to talk me into getting a job and, you know, tempting me with how much salary I'd be making and everything else. And I tried not to go over to the building at all, not to be unduly tempted. But I decided to go to grad school. And I was pretty unaware of the different departments and universities throughout the country. But I decided I basically 00:02:00wanted to stay in the Midwest. So I'd applied to, um, oh, three, four universities, Wisconsin and Indiana and some ones I don't really remember now. And my original plan was to try to just get a remission of out-of-state tuition and finish in a year and do my MA and then go back to, well I [word unclear], I thought that perhaps I could get a job teaching in a college with an MA. After having come to Madison, I realized that was impossible. But, um, so I did not apply for a teaching assistantship or a fellowship.

LS: Well, what year is this?

KG: This is year '73.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: So I would be applying in, uh, the winter of '73 about, '72, '73. And so I applied to Madison and got accepted here, and they offered me a teaching assistant. And I thought, well, that's not a bad deal. And it included remission 00:03:00of out-of-state tuition, and so I decided to do that. But that wasn't my original plan.

LS: Do they always offer teaching assistantships to people who apply?

KG: Well, I had a lot of experience teaching, and I was certified, and I had, uh, taught a year at Concordia. And I think they looked at my dossier and thought that I would, you know, be a good teaching assistant. And, uh, because they didn't offer, the fellowships were starting to peter out. There weren't too many of those, so they offered me that, and then I accepted. That was about in January of '73. So I decided to come here. And because I wasn't at all familiar with Wisconsin or Madison, I decided to live in the French House, which proved later to be an interesting experience.

LS: Oh, boy, was this when Betty Schmitz was running it?

KG: Uh-huh, uh-huh, right.

LS: Oh.

KG: So, uh, when I came to Madison, I guess I was basically lost. And I remember first coming to Madison, going down State Street, and my first impression was that it was really wild. I was going, I don't believe this, you know. I remember 00:04:00my mom was completely shuddering because she thought it was even wilder than that.

LS: Now are you talking about long hair or lots of people or what?

KG: No, like the colors of the buildings, red and yellow, and it was, everyone just, there were a lot of people in the streets, and the -- it contrast to Bismarck, quite a bit, yep. And I really liked it.

And I got, um, assigned to office 632 in Van Hise, which is crucial to why I got involved in the TAA. I was basically not aware that there was a union. I remember reading in my appointment letters saying that membership in the teaching assistant association is not a condition of employment, and you don't have to be. And that's my first contact with it was, I thought, oh, well. And then 632 Van Hise was also occupied by Phyllis Karrh and Elsa Steco who were very active, very militant members of the union. And Phyllis had been president before. And it was just assumed that everyone in that office was a member of the TAA. And I signed the card, sure, right away and really without thinking about 00:05:00it a lot. And they were real insistent that you come to meetings and I, I went to a few meetings. I was kind of unaware of what was happening, and I hadn't any history of the strike or the contract or anything like that, but --

LS: How many were in the office, just the three of you?

KG: No, there were six or eight.

LS: And when, they were all in the union?

KG: Uh-huh. It was, it's continued to be an office where there's a lot of union people or there's, you know, the people have the same ideas, and people switch into our office. So it's, I guess you could say right now the French Department is a lot -- there were a lot fewer members than there used to be. It's gone down percentage-wise. But 632 is still --

LS: Do you mean not all the TAs in the French Department are in the TAA?

KG: No. At one time, it used to be about 90%, 85%. But now it's a lot less than that.

LS: Oh, really?

KG: Yeah.

LS: Does this create hard feelings?

KG: Oh, yes, because I think the people who are in French, who are in the union, 00:06:00are pretty actively involved. If they're not doing something actively, at least they're aware of what's going on, and the, quote, unquote, vote right.

LS: Yeah.

KG: You know, they might not go to all the meetings, but they'll say, what's happening? And, oh, I understand. And they're with the, you know, the trend of the union even if they're not physically active in all the activities. But it's changed a lot in the year I was gone, last year. And this first semester, the new TAs who have come in are a lot more conservative, quote, unquote. And there are a lot fewer members than there used to be.

LS: And that, it is because they're conservative and worried about jobs and do you think?

KG: I think, uh, well, some of the basic objections to being in the union that I, through my organizing through other things there that people are worried about job security that if I belong to the union, therefore, the, the professors will know. Therefore the department chair will know, and that's going to affect my work, which is, especially in the French Department, it's really ludicrous because we always had an excellent rapport with the chair.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: And, uh, any time there's been a problem, it's been a cooperation between the affiliates and the chair, especially when Herb [Gotchburg?] was chair of the department.

LS: So you don't think it's ever affected anybody's chance of getting a job?

KG: Oh, absolutely not. I think the proof that, oh, I think they're worried about finishing, not getting a job. But they're worried about they're going to flunk prelims. A lot of people have said that. Well, they're not going to pass their prelims, and Phyllis and Elsa who, two of the most militant people I know, who have gone through really well. And you show it them, and says, well, maybe, you know, but -- I think another side of it is they're conservative. They're not aware. The idea of union to them is, is, um, they're not really aware of what that means, but they shy away from it.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: I haven't talked to too many new TAs, so I can't say. But that's generally some of the reasons you get when somebody doesn't want to be a member of the union. But 632 Van Hise has always been 100% union membership. We just kick 00:08:00everyone else out.

LS: Okay. Carry on. I didn't mean to interrupt you.

KG: Oh, that's okay. So I guess basically knowing Phyllis and knowing Elsa, that got me involved in meetings. And I, the first year, I sporadically went to them, understanding more or less what was going on.

And one of the big issues was, in the second semester that year, was national affiliation, whether we were going to affiliate. And if we were, with whom? And I remember there was a curious meeting about, there was a representative from the, can't remember if it was the national or if it was the state, but the state or national NEA and the state or national AFT.

And the one from the NEA was dressed to match the Madison community, you know, blue jeans, etc. And yet, the ideas that he was espousing were not, so it was really contrast with what he was wearing. And yet the person from the AFT, and I 00:09:00don't remember if it was the AFT or WAFT, uh, who later became our coordinator, and that's the organization we later joined, came in a suit and tie and everything.

So it's really funny what, you know, what was going on there. But we eventually decided to affiliate nationally, that it would be useful, and that it would further our goals. And we affiliated with the Wisconsin Federation teachers and the American Federation teachers and then became more active in, uh, the national, well, the state organization and the national to a certain extent. We were unique in the idea that we were one of the few if not the only teaching assistants that was organized, one of the few college unions, and the only teaching assistants.

LS: Yes, I think, I think that's true.

KG: Yeah, there's another one now that's affiliated the American Federation of Teachers in Michigan, I believe. And we were, we helped instigate that. We 00:10:00helped them organize into a union, and then we helped them affiliate too. But at that time, we were pretty unique.

LS: Was the TAA unanimous in wanting to join a union?

KG: Oh, no, absolutely not. There was a lot of feeling that, well, we'll just get out on our own, and the minute you, the minute you, you know, affiliate with a national thing, that's really union then. You can call it, you know, Teaching Assistant's Association, you can just be there and be worried about the, you know, the job of security, etc., different benefits of the union. But the minute you associate with a larger union, then it really becomes a union activity. And, of course, American Federation of Teachers was affiliated with AFL-CIO, and that scared a lot of people off.

LS: Now was this the more conservative or the more radical that scared off --

KG: Well, no, the more, well, the more conservative because I think that the more liberal people in the union were always [words unclear] labor groups.

LS: I just wondered of some of the radicals might've thought that was a step backward to associate with --

KG: Um, I guess some of them thought that, well, we can just make it on our own. 00:11:00But I think most people were realistic about that we needed to get involved more in what was happening in the state especially and throughout the, our affiliation, we have, um, sponsored people to elected offices, and we've really taken an active role in conventions and how the state organization is operating. And, uh, I think we felt at that time that it was an important facet of continue -- you know, we, we've been in Madison now for a few years, but we have to fit into the global sort of structure. And we went to the, um, I and two or three other members of the union went to the national American Federation of Teachers convention.

LS: You as president or --

KG: As president, it was in August of, must've been August '74 then, uh-huh, and --

LS: How did they receive you?

KG: Well, it was real interesting because the convention of teachers was just like a convention of anything else, and that's their vacation time in the year. 00:12:00And they were there to, they knew Al [Shanker?] was going to get elected, and, and there were a lot of people for him, and there were, um, there was a faction against him. But basically, everyone thought he was going to get elected. And they were there for a good time, whereas, we were there really seriously considering this was a political convention.

And, you know, when we spoke against [words unclear] and things like that, and what we really wanted to do was make ourselves known. And we met with a lot of the, oh, the department, the head of the department of colleges, for example, the AFT, and we had meetings with him. And we wanted to get help in organizing other unions at other campuses and basically things like that. But we took it really seriously. When, when we decided to vote, we abstained. And that was a, I think that was an important decision. I don't think too many of the unions there were too concerned about the political--

I remember that the last convention I ever went, there was a party in the, it was an Albert Shanker victory party, and it was in a big, huge ballroom of one of the hotels. And we had a belly dancer, and it was really funny. And I was going, a convention of, national convention of teachers is no different from a national convention of insurance people or anything else. But we really worked for a week, and we didn't get a lot of sleep. And we tried to meet people and get around and [words unclear].

LS: How did they look upon you? How did they receive you when you went to talk to the president?

KG: Well, I guess it was, because we were so unique, they weren't super concerned. I mean, when you get to the national, like a department of colleges even, you know, at that level, we were kind of insignificant. But they were real, you know, they were polite and considerate, and they talked to us. And we had further dealings with the. And now, they've given us, we have received, for example, funding to, for airfare to go and organize other places where they 00:14:00need, they need help in organizing. And we have received airfare to do that. So they have helped us.

LS: So they do take you seriously.

KG: Uh-huh, oh, I think so, to a, to a certain extent, in comparison with our size. But that was one of the main issues the first year that I was involved with the union. And what happened was the last meeting of the year, and it -- I think, well, I think it's understandable, but a, not a great many of, number of TAs come to meetings.

LS: I was going to ask you that.

KG: And it -- it's real depressing, especially when I was president. You know, you're conducting a meeting, and there's 30-40 people there, and you have a 500 membership.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: But people have a lot of things going on, and if they're not truly committed to the union, they probably don't come to meetings. A lot of people, like I said before, are aware of what's going on, and they'll find out, but they're not 00:15:00going to spend the time to go to the meeting. I can think of a few in French that will always come down and say, well, what's this election about, and who should I vote for, and what's going on? And you explain it to them, and they say, okay, and I understand, and, you know, but to get them to meetings, it's a little more difficult.

But we had this last meeting of the year, and we were supposed to nominate people for the elected offices, and the TAA has a tradition of having one person on the ballot usually. I mean, if you can get one person to run for an office, you're doing well. The voting against, you know, voting for or against someone else is, usually doesn't happen. People just aren't willing to take the responsibility, and it's a lot of work. And it's not paid, and it's, uh, it takes a lot of time. So there aren't too many people willing to do that.

Anyway, so we had this last meeting and nobody would nominated or be nominated for president. Everyone turned it down, and, oh, I think it was [Evitco?] was 00:16:00nominated, and he didn't want to do it, and somebody else, etc. And Elsa and Phyllis, who appeared in the story once before, came and said, well, would you want to do it, Karen? And I said, I don't have, you know, I'm really not that political. I mean, I didn't have any background. And I said, president of the union, you know, maybe a lower office or something.

And they just said, well, you can do it, Karen. You're real organized. You're real efficient. [pause] And I said, yeah, I guess, okay. And I regretted that decision later, but, so then I said, okay, well, I'll do it. And then people asked me various questions as far as what do you think the role of the national affiliation should be? What do you think the role of organizing a campus is? How would you go about it? And, you know different questions like that, and then there was another woman who was in the German Department, Nancy Schultz.

And she said, well, I'm going to nominate myself because I really think we should have someone on the ballot who has had more experience. I said, fine, you can do it, you know, I really don't care. But she could've, you know, I thought, 00:17:00stated that beforehand because I felt kind of in a, you know, just a kind of an embarrassing position. Well, you talked me into this, and now, all of a sudden, I'm not experienced, and you don't want me to do it. I didn't really care. But then I talked to her afterwards, and we kind of came to the conclusion that, well, one of us would be president, and the other would be organizing chairperson because that's kind of two major roles in the union.

And then it was right before vacation, spring vacation, and we were supposed to write up a paragraph, a little paragraph about what our positions were. And so I thought about that a lot, and did that. And when I came back, I found out that she just pulled her name off the ballot, which made me feel even worse. I mean, to stand up in front of the meeting and say, well, I think I should be it or someone should be it who has more experience and then cop out at the last minute. So I was on the ballot by myself. And, see, I was going to say I really don't think I should be either, but I got in the position of, again, I was the only one left.

So I said, okay, I'll do it. And when you are the only person on the ballot, 00:18:00it's pretty easy to get elected. So I was elected president, not a lot of opposition [word unclear] you don't have to worry about the results, you know. Election eve was pretty intense.

LS: It doesn't have that there are only two votes for you and none against you?

KG: Yeah, well, there was a few more than that, but then --

LS: They elect the other officers too at the same time?

KG: Uh-huh. It's all done at the same time, and there was also a sending people to the national convention voting for delegates to that on the same election. And, uh, I had gone back to Bismarck for the summer. And when I came back, the first thing I did was spend a week in Toronto at the national convention. It was good. It really got me into what was going on. And, uh, it was our first year with national affiliation, with state affiliation, so we did a lot of going to the various conferences and seminars that the state was putting on, becoming 00:19:00involved in that, becoming involved in their own elections, and --

LS: That must've taken a lot of time.

KG: It did, yeah, I would say I spent 25-30 hours a week doing it.

LS: Plus, plus teaching.

KG: Oh, plus teaching and grad school, and that was a semester. The first semester I was president was, I had my MA exam too. My social life was slightly curtailed, you might say.

LS: I gather you did all right in your MA exam.

KG: I passed it. If I wouldn't have, I probably would be upset toward the union, except that I found that I could fit it in. But again, as I mentioned to you before, I think that one of my major roles was administrative organizing, but one of the first things I did was clean out the office.

LS: Where is the office?

KG: In the YMCA on Brooks Street, and there were stencils from '68 and from the strike, and it was really a mess, and it was hard for me to work in a place like that. So I went through that, and I went through all the files and organized a 00:20:00filing system so we could find things.

LS: And this was all by yourself, or were some people helping you?

KG: Oh, yeah, a couple people helped, but basically I kind of set up the filing system, and went through, um, that, so we kind of had a basis for it. And tried to set up a little more organized administration as far as having a list. I think this had been done before, but I tried to keep it out, you know, through the, going on through the whole year as far as notification, like having a list of stewards or contacts. And then every week, I dittoed, copies of the stewards' council meeting had to go to these people. And that was done before, but they weren't really kept. So I started a file and kept all of those.

LS: You, did you do all of this, the filing, and the dittoing, and --

KG: Well, no, I mean, I, every meeting somebody else took notes, and somebody else dittoed it, but I guess it was to see it got done. And a lot of times, well, the idea of administrating is that you find somebody else to do it.

LS: Yeah, but you --

KG: Which is a nice idea, but usually you managed to do a lot of it yourself. 00:21:00But, um, I think that helped, and especially in bargaining. One of the things I did that I know had never been done before and was that, um, it's real easy to have a helter-skelter sort of thing, and it's like, you come in, and you're going to talk about a proposal, and you don't know what the next person is going to say on your side, you know, on your side of the table, which makes it very difficult to lead a really, a frontal attack sort of thing.

So I had everyone who was going to be the main speaker on a topic, they did a ditto on their main points that they were going to pursue. And so we might have four or five proposals we were talking about at one meeting, and then everyone had to bring, you know, lists, a stack of papers to hand out to the other people on the bargaining team about, listing their major points. And that worked, not too bad. And then I kept a complete list of all the discussion and all the, the 00:22:00points that were made for all the propositions.

LS: You were going to the bargaining sessions yourself?

KG: Oh, yes, uh-huh, there was a team of about, about five or six, who went almost all the time and then people who would come every now and again. But I was part of the permanent bargaining team.

LS: So you got, you were very involved by this time?

KG: Oh, yes, I was spending a lot of time. I'm still not sure that I felt super political. I mean, maybe I'm just knocking myself in a certain way. I don't know, but I felt I was really good about being efficient and getting things done and calling people and getting the ball rolling. But I got more involved politically, and I got, in bargaining, I got really involved in several issues. And --

LS: Which issues?

KG: Well, one of them was class size that I felt really strongly about. But one of the things about bargaining TAs that traditionally is not super polite. In other words, Ed Krinske, who was the negotiator for the University had been called several names in the past. And I said, okay, now, this is, we can do this 00:23:00on a certain level. We can be calm and logical about it.

And that lasted for about a month, and I realized they're not being logical on the other side. They're not presenting reasonable arguments. They're not being reasonable. Why should we? And it kind of got back, not name calling, but I think we were much more emotional about it. And everyone told me that it wasn't going to work, and they were right. It wasn't going to work trying to be very reasonable and logical and calm and --

LS: I'm interested because Kevin [Koberle?] commented that this year, I think he was talking about this year, the whole atmosphere of the bargaining had changed.

KG: In that, what --

LS: It was much more reasonable and, uh, no name-calling, and he wondered why this was.

KG: Well, it might've been the personalities. I got a little up set because there were two or three people who were stars at this and who would really, you 00:24:00know, start calling names or doing stuff like that. But I thought it was pretty ludicrous.

LS: Who were they?

KG: Phyllis and Tom were good at that, Phyllis Karrh and Tom Wolfe, not to call anyone name callers, but Hank would also not restrain himself all the time.

LS: Yes, but he's [words unclear].

KG: Pretty vehement, yeah, right, but we started out, you know, being real reasonable and, but I'm not saying that it went into name calling or anything like that, but I think we were much more forceful, forceful in our arguments at the end. And, uh, let's see --

Some of the issues that were, I think one of the major issues was class size, and that we -- what happens is that for bargaining is we propose, we have a set of propositions, proposals, and then we give it to the university a couple weeks before bargaining starts. And then we negotiate on those. And if they have any other proposals they want to propose on their side, they do. And at the 00:25:00beginning, we thought class size was pretty, we'll try to improve it, and the minute we started bargaining, they started to eat away at it.

But they wouldn't give us any specific language. They were going to do something about class size. And let's just get everything out of the way and work on the classes issue. Well, it was very integral to the contract, and so one of the things was when they were going to give us their language on classes, what it would be, because if it meant hinting that it would be, oh, instead of 19, it was going to be 21, or it was going to be 24 average, and this was great concern. We had a special announcement that anyone could attend bargain -- they always can attend bargaining. We have opening bargaining. But we really tried to urge people to come in, undergrads in.

LS: And did they?

KG: And we had about 100 people there. And we each gave, four or five of us gave a little wrap in the beginning about where bargaining was and what was happening. And the administration got real intimidated by it. They thought it was a zoo. But people were really quiet, and they were just listening. But every 00:26:00once in awhile, somebody would make a remark like, you know, you're really off the wall. What do you mean, raise class size? And for a minute, they walked out. But they came back in. And they finally gave us a class size proposal, which, um, was a, oh, what's the word, regressive, in that they raised it. I can't remember exactly what the proposal was, but now in the new contract, it doesn't sound like it's real different, but it really is.

LS: Is it a question of whether it's by department?

KG: Yeah, and I was just doing some statistics in the French Department, and, uh, the beginning 101-102 French classes are a lot higher, and the, but if you average, a lot of them are, they would never average out to 21. They're like 23, like 23 in 101 and 22 in 102. But then the 203-204 classes, which have been traditionally smaller, when you average that out over the whole department of al 00:27:00TA-taught courses, then you get your average contract, you know, for the contract language. But the effect it has is increasing people in the beginning language courses. And it's very blatant when you, you know, you look at the figures.

LS: Now you're talking about this year. But when you were talking about bargaining, that's in 1970 --

KG: Well, when I was bargaining, it was '74-'75.

LS: Because it did, it has changed since then, hasn't it?

KG: It has.

LS: The last year's contract --

KG: Uh-huh, well, the strike, well, the work stoppage and everything is April was because of the negotiations that went on the year before. These things really drag out. I mean, it's not a year, and then you get a contract. And then you, a lot of times, we go without a contract, and that's what happened, I think, after because we never signed a contract at the end of the bargaining session I was participating in.

LS: I see.

KG: But they just kind of abide by it, so to speak, more or less, but the work stoppage as far as I'm, I don't have too direct knowledge of that because I wasn't here. But that was one of the big issues. But the work stoppage went 00:28:00along okay, but then the TAs wouldn't vote for a strike. And if you won't strike, that's about the last weapon you have, and if you're not willing to strike for something, you're probably not going to get it. If we would've had an effective strike, we might've gotten our old class-size language back and some other things.

But I, I don't know. I guess I'm maybe sort of critical TAs, but I think a lot of people were basically cowards. They're not willing to fight for anything. They're just not willing -- they're so worried about themselves and so worried they're going to lose money for this month or they're going to lose their salary, somebody's going to remember they were in a strike. And you just wonder, these people are going out in the big, cold, cruel world, and if that's the same kind of attitude they have, they're not going to stand up for anything.

You know, if you're not going to fight for it now, what are you going to do later on? And these people are going to be heads of businesses or whatever, and that's the same attitude they're going to have. They're going to be so afraid to stick up for what they believe in, that their beliefs are going to change. I 00:29:00think it's, you know, it's pretty serious, like you have to make decisions pretty early about what you consider to be right and wrong and if you're going to stand up for it or not. And not too many people would. So there was no strike.

LS: Yeah.

KG: Which is an oversimplification of it, but I think there comes a time when you have to say, well, maybe I'm going to lose a month's salary, but it's worth it. And you have to think of the other TAs who are coming along and what it's going to do basically to the union in general. But, uh, I'm, I'm really worried about the union. I think that this continual voting down of strikes, uh, is weakening us greatly.

And that the first time, when I was president, we had voted, we had a strike vote, I remember that Krinske had sent out a ditto to all his administrators, people, heads, etc. the day before saying that we will continue on as planned if 00:30:00the strike votes, we will hold classes and everything. So they were worried to a certain, worried, quote, unquote, to a certain extent, that we were going to, I think they were more confident that we were going to vote to strike than the, the, um, leaders, quote, unquote, of the union would, he was more confident that we were going to strike than we were, and we didn't strike.

LS: [Words unclear].

KG: And if that happens year after year, all of a sudden they're going to say, they're never going to strike because they haven't striked, they haven't striked, stricken, uh, they haven't had a strike for so long.

LS: Do you think the, uh, the leadership would have anything to do with this, if there had been a different, more militant..?

KG: Well, actually, um, I'm not really sure. There's, the TAA is super democratic. Everything that's decided at, any policy, any major decision is decided at a membership meeting, and every steward's council, somebody brings something up and says, uh, well, we think the steward's council should have the 00:31:00right to do this. And we go back to the constitution saying, no, the steward's council doesn't have the policy, doesn't have the right to make policy, and it's the membership meeting. And it seems like year after year, you keep hearing the same discussions. But it's always traditionally been within our constitution that the membership decides. Now admittedly, if you want to examine it in close detail, the membership is often composed of the steward's council plus a little bit because we don't have a lot of people coming. But still, it was all advertised, and everyone could come if they wanted to. And they realized that that is when people who are [word unclear], so it's democratic to the extent that the majority is willing to participate, which --

LS: The stewards do come. Is that right? Do you have weekly meetings?

KG: Well, um, the thing with that again is the stewards' council was strictly representative, I would feel that we could, the membership would perhaps give it more power. But what happens is that the stewards are the people who are active 00:32:00in various head departments, and if you examine the steward's council, you might have 15 people there, and they might be from 6 or 7 departments.

LS: Now I thought each department, how many stewards does each department have?

KG: Well, basically, each department, for example, the French Department has about 50 TAs, 50-60, probably 50 now. And they're allowed three stewards. So what they do is --

LS: Now do you, TAA, you mean? Or do you mean TAs? Are you talking about members in the TAA or --

KG: Oh, well, no, there are 50 like TAs across the department. But it's determined on the number of TAs, not the number of members.

LS: Oh, okay.

KG: And then they're elected. But again, it's like there's three people on the ballot and three people get elected.

LS: Yeah.

KG: It's hard enough to get people to do it. But what they do is they stretch it out, and one goes each week. So they only go once every three weeks. And then some of the people who are active will go too, you know, from the department. But there are a few key departments that are pretty active, and a lot of it's in 00:33:00Letters & Sciences. Most of it's in Letters and Sciences. So when you have steward's council, it's a pretty biased group. It's the people who are active, it's the people who are more liberal, it's the people who are more militant who come to the steward's council. Therefore, you've got, you know, a certain strata, but it's pretty, it's pretty limited. So you almost have to have a membership meeting to at least include some, you know, some other opinions, some other ideas. I think it's unfortunate that it's, there's not a steward from every department, even -- well, a lot of departments were not organized, and we don't have affiliates and, for example --

LS: You're talking about in engineering or --

KG: Yeah, engineering, well, we have somebody now because we switched to engineering from [word unclear] from Letters & Sciences, but agriculture, for example, we've never even, you know, hardly -- somebody was organizing there one year, but I don't know if they got any members in or not or engineering --

LS: You think they should have somebody?

KG: Well, I think it, if -- that would be an ideal situation, being totally organized all over, but I think that if, if there were stewards from every department, if it was representative, then I would be willing to vote for giving the steward's council more power.

LS: I see, yes.

KG: But because it's not really a representative group, even though we'd like it to be, I think that you have to go back to the membership meeting and rely on that issue statement of policy.

But in the years that I've been there, the stewardship council membership has increased greatly. We'd be doing good if we had ten people, usually six or seven people. And now, the last few ones I've been going to, there have been between 15 to 20 people, which is a pretty good increase.

LS: Why? Why is it, do you think?

KG: Well, um, from what I observed from coming back, I think that there's a lot of good organizational things going on. There's an educational committee that meets regularly and discusses issues. They're publishing articles in the Cap 00:35:00Times. There is an organization committee that's been, that's active, that meets, they meet, you know, together with a, themselves, every, oh, every two or three weeks. And they're, it's always in a report at the steward's council. And I guess there's more people involved so that those things can be spread out, so you can have a real active sharing but organizing. We never had that many people involved before.

LS: How did all this come about?

KG: Well, I'm not really sure whether it's just more people have become involved. Our total membership hasn't increased. In fact, if anything, it's gone down. But there is just a larger core of, of interested people.

LS: What is the thing in the Cap Times?

KG: Well, the educational committee, one of the things they want to do is publish a, you know, a booklet composed of articles written by TAs about educational issues. And they're also trying to put articles in the Cap Times. I'm not sure how successful they've been at that. They've had one or two insofar. But concerning items that, in specific departments, you know, what's as 00:36:00a, like as a French TA, what problems do you see, educational problems, and things like that. And, uh, so I think things are moving pretty fast. Things seem to be more organized this year. There's more division of power or authority or whatever you'd like to say. I think when I was doing it, there were three or four people who were doing everything. And now it's, it's a broader base, which is really good if that continues.

LS: Hank Haslet said that, that, uh, he or several people were trying to get a leadership by, what was the word he used? So they didn't have elected offices, that you had sort of a --

KG: A group?

LS: Yeah. Similar, in order to avoid, to spread the authority around to get more 00:37:00people involved, I think, was the idea.

KG: Yeah, the only problem with that is that somebody has to take the initiative to get, has to take the responsibility of getting all these people together.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: And I think Bob Ginsburg as president has done that too. That would be an ideal really democratic thing to do. But I'm not sure if it's too impossible --

LS: In other words, you're feeling that it's happened.

KG: Well, I think there would be a lot more people involved than before. When, for example, when I was president, there wasn't an organizing committee chair. Nancy was always going to do it, and, uh, that was our agreement. If she would be president, she was going to be organizing committee. She never did anything all year. So it was very difficult, you know, calling all the time, were you going, were you going to, wa -- are you going to get groups started, are you going to get people on organizing?

And now, this year, Gabrielle [Garcier?] is from the German Department, and she is organizing committee, and she always has, you know, her whole notebook about when things that have been done or when they're having a meeting, and it's 00:38:00always announced at steward's council. And it looks like they're really getting more things done, more organizing done on the educational committee. Randy [Droll?] is the, the head of that.

And, uh, they would always have reports to Wisconsin, and they seem to be getting a lot of things done too. So maybe the destination of these people in these key positions has, has helped that. Maybe it's just more people who are really concerned who are really involved.

LS: Well, that's good. The timeline of state react to the last, uh, the worst thought was that the TAA was dead, but [words unclear].

KG: Well, I think if it continued for a few more years without, you know, without sticking up for -- it's difficult to go through bargaining and to take a position and then back down from it. And you do that year after year, eventually, they're going to offer you nothing.

LS: But what about some of the things that the TAA could do, not in terms of trying to get hours or pay just, just to be a gadfly on the campus, where it 00:39:00wouldn't be a question of having a strike to do it, but just making the issues known, such as the investigation of the budget, has that been going on?

KG: Uh, yes, we've always been trying to get the tapes so that we can analyze it.

LS: But you, haven't you gotten them yet?

KG: Uh, no. That's a continual sort of thing. Trying to get information out of the University is very difficult, and we want the information, we want the computer tapes, so that we can analyze the budget ourselves and say that -- they always come back with this, well, we can't, well, we can't bargain wages. And, uh, that we can't give you, the Legislature decides all that. And the budget is, there just isn't any money. Well, what we want to do is examine the budget so we can make our own determination of where funds are going.

LS: But you were granted the right to do that, what, last fall some time.

KG: Undoubtedly, but I'm not, again, too familiar with what's been happening. I remember seeing it on a -- but being granted the right to do it and getting the actual tapes, I don't think we've procured them yet.

LS: Oh.

KG: As my knowledge, I don't think we've gotten them yet.

LS: That is a lot --

KG: One of the biggest hassles, really, when I was president is trying to get labels. I can't imagine how many hours I spent running to Peterson and running to Computer Science. They, as per our contract, per contract language, we were supposed to have the X number, four or three, three I think, three copies of labels of all the teaching assistants. Well, that's essential so that we --

LS: Labels?

KG: Um, computer labels with the name and the address so that we could send out mailings.

LS: Oh, I see, you just recently doing lately, okay.

KG: Yeah, to send out mailings to all TAs, and, uh, first of all, they gave us a list and it was, they had the departments in code. Well, 3-1-4, it's hard to send that out to campus mail, you know. Or they were missing this, or they were missing that, or they didn't have everyone. And I spent a lot of time, and said, well, the computer isn't capable of doing that. And you're going, I find that 00:41:00hard to believe. You should program it to --

LS: They send it out to all the faculty. You can get something sent to all the faculty.

KG: Oh, yeah. We were supposed to get this, but it, they just went on and on, and we never got it so we could get our mailings out. And it was a big hassle. And our lists are pretty inaccurate. I think that the information we'll get from the University isn't super updated.

LS: Do you think this is deliberate or just inefficiency?

KG: Oh, I think it's -- yeah, I think part of it's deliberate. Something else in that regard is we had a discussion last night at steward's council about time limits as far as our grievance. We have a grievance procedure. Step one is you meet with the department. Step two is you meet with the chancellor's representative, which is now Judy Murphy. And step three is arbitration. And there's certain limits, and I couldn't just state them off the cuff like that, but it's something like seven, after you meet with the chair at step one, they have 17 days to respond.

And at that time, you have two weeks to go to step two, etc. And they had been 00:42:00stalling, and their basic analysis of this is that, well, they think that the limits are too stringent, and that they're not going to abide by them, and if we really want to press it, they'll just take everything to arbitration and try to drain us of funds because it costs a lot to go, it costs about $1,000 to go to arbitration.

LS: Now who is they in this case?

KG: Well, the chancellor's representative, she, Judy Murphy, intimidated, intimated that, uh, well, if you keep on insisting that we make up the time limits and that we meet the time limits, we're just going to say no to everything at step two, deny everything at step two so that you're forced to go to arbitration. And we made kind of a decision last night at steward's council that what we would do was wait until we got something that, um, we were sure we were going to win and then just go to arbitration. And I don't think it looks good on their side either to take a lot of kids into arbitration. I'm sure the chancellor says, you're spending a lot of money on arbitration.

Even though it's a, a minimum amount compared to the whole University budget, 00:43:00I'm sure it's not good for them either except that it hurts us a lot more than it does them. But when you have a grievance structure that's not workable, that's, it's pretty important, is to have a viable grievance procedure. And another thing they're doing is kind of stalling and saying, well, we're, know there's a problem in this department, and we're trying to remedy it.

But it doesn't have anything to do with a specific grievance. I think major, mainly, it's a major, it's a face saving sort of thing. And we're most interested that things get done, and we know they were the result of a grievance even if they're not willing to admit it. But, um, because they're not willing to admit it's tied up with the grievance, we don't get the information on what's happening.

LS: But does that, do you mind if it doesn't go, if it doesn't get settled through a grievance procedure as long as it gets settled, or would you prefer that it goes through --

KG: Well, I think once, it all depends on what kind of a grievance it is. If they're willing to, um, not deal with a specific case but change everything in the department, but when we, we have a specific case we, have one person. Well, if they're going to, not going to remedy that situation it's important. I mean, you have to deal with a specific case. I guess we are most involved with, most concerned with raising issues, saying if there's something wrong with the department, filing a grievance on it, and of getting it resolved.

Now whether they're going to admit, um, it was because of the grievance, just so they change it, I think that's the most important thing, in my own personal opinion, it is. Because we know very well it's because of the grievance. They wouldn't have done a thing if it wasn't. So, I mean, it's, no matter what they say, it's kind of obvious what happened.

LS: So, so you, this gives the TAA a function, which may not be very visible, but certainly is a certainly is a value--

KG: Well, we still consider it that way, and when we, you know, we put in the newsletter the grievances filed, such and such was done.

LS: Yeah.

KG: We kind of make A, therefore, B, even if they are not willing to do that. But one of the major functions of the union is filing grievances and, uh, that's enforcing the contract to see that the contract is enforced. So it's important that we have a workable situation and if things get delayed, the later something is delayed, the remedy is kind of -- well, for example, classes, if you file a class size grievance, saying that one class is 26 or 27 people in it, and it's only supposed to have 24. Well, if you file that in the third week, there's a possibility that another section will be created, which means another job for a TA. If you file it in the fifth or sixth week, uh, the people might've dropped, so it might've gone down to 24.

LS: Yeah, I was going to say.

KG: Or it's too late to create another section. You can't take people out of a class in the sixth week of class. It's difficult. So if they're going to stall 00:46:00on something like that, then they'll come to the point where there's no remedy possible. So having them to admit that they were wrong, and, yes, the third week of class there was 26, but now there's not, so it's all solved is, uh, it's not too good.

LS: You don't think that's a sufficient --

KG: Well, no, because at that third week of class, there's supposed to be 24, not at the fifth or the sixth. It's supposed to be the third week of the class. So I guess --

LS: And some might've dropped out, you mean, because it was such a big class, is that possible?

KG: Well, people at this university drop classes pretty easily. And seeing it's to the 12th week, you have people who stay out to the 10th, and then drop. I don't think it's too good of a system, but, uh --

LS: Why doesn't the TAA tackle that?

KG: Well, I suppose in a way, it's okay. I think it's very difficult to teach a class where the, you have, especially in the language, where you're involved with individuals, and when you're trying to get as much contact and as much language out of them as possible, and you, in essence, wasting your time on 00:47:00people that aren't, are going to drop at the end, or are going to drop after ten weeks. And if they would've dropped in the first couple of weeks, you would have spent more time on the people who continued.

LS: Sure.

KG: And it's kind of depressing.

LS: Why couldn't you pick that up as an issue, or has, have you thought of picking that up as an issue to fight the administration on?

KG: No, I don't --

LS: Your own interests wouldn't be with the TAA --

KG: -- possible, and you, in essence, wasting your time on people that aren't, are going to drop at the end, or are going to drop after ten weeks. And if they would've dropped in the first couple of weeks, you would have spent more time on the people who continued.

LS: Sure.

KG: And it's kind of depressing.

LS: Why couldn't you pick that up as an issue, or has, have you thought of picking that up as an issue to fight the administration on?

KG: No, I don't --

LS: Your own interests wouldn't be with the TAA wouldn't be --

KG: Well, that's, I'm saying that personally as a teacher, I feel that way.

LS: Yeah.

KG: And as far as having people sign up for classes, it would probably be advantageous for the TA to have more people sign up and not drop out because then more sections would be created, and there would be more jobs.

LS: Yeah. And also as they drop out, you have smaller groups of people too.

KG: Yeah, yeah, otherwise, the, if people didn't sign up, then we would have higher, basically higher class size. So with people dropping, we end up with smaller classes. It's just that I think 12 weeks is a bit long. Six or seven would be, by the sixth week, you know if you're going to drop, you should drop it or not. You've already had six weeks' grades, you've had enough in class contact. But a lot of people take the same class twice, and they go through ten weeks, and then the next time, they take it for a grade.

LS: Oh, is that the reason?

KG: Well, I think, um, people get to the ten week, and they realize that they don't want to accept the grade they've gotten, and they'll take it again next 00:49:00semester. And they've got all that ten weeks. Except that generally, it's like people taking a language, who've had it before. They say, oh, no problem, I'll just slough through this, and they get to the third week, and all of a sudden, they've got new material. So it doesn't, it doesn't work all that well. But as far as like a class size grievance, we were talking about remedies. If it's not done expediently in the first, you know, the third week or so, you've lost your grievance.

LS: Yeah, yes, I see.

KG: There's nothing you can do afterwards. So that's, one of our problems is to get those things done right away. But, uh --

LS: Do you talk to the department chairman before filing a grievance? Does he, is the chairman will solve it?

KG: Well, that's step one. That's the chair.

LS: Oh, it is? I see.

KG: The meeting with the chair, but I guess on an informal basis, what I did this semester, I wasn't the, the buck was passed to me. And I got to examine the DRIs, the Departmental Instructional Reports to see what the class sizes were. 00:50:00And I did that kind of in conjunction with the secretary, one of the secretaries in the office who had them. And I said, oh-oh, there's 27 here. Why is there 27? And there was 26 in another one. And she checked, and they were the, the TAs, and those people weren't attending class.

They were, they had not corrected their, you know, their reports, their sheets they're supposed to fill out. And they were not attending. But I called the TAs to be sure that those people hadn't been attending in the third week of class. But there were a couple problems, and then there were some other figures that weren't there. And they checked on it. But that was real informal. But in French, like I said, we have a really pretty good rapport. And a lot of the other departments, you wouldn't be able to do that.

LS: In other words, the chair, the chair wouldn't do that, wouldn't check and say, are there too many people in this class? You have, you do it.

KG: Well, I think in the French Department, they're really, they're concerned 00:51:00about a hole in the contract.

LS: Oh.

KG: And if something is pointed out, they'll usually change.

LS: But they don't take the initiative themselves to find out if something is wrong.

KG: Uh, I'm not sure whether they'd already gone and averaged them or not. It's somebody's responsibility in the department, the person who's head of the assignment committee to do it. But it was about the fifth week before we got around to it. And I don't think it'd been done yet. But you kind of have to keep an eye on them, you know. You have to go in and do it and say, well, look here, this is wrong. And let's do -- now, for example, if they were unwilling to resolve it, then we would've filed a grievance.

LS: Yeah.

KG: Or if, in fact, those people were still attending at the end of the third week of class, but they showed that they weren't. And I had checked with the specific TAs, and they hadn't been. So it was okay, and I averaged up everything, and it came pretty close. It was like 18.9 or something like that. But it was within the limits. But I still have yet, one of the things I want to do is do a ditto and show the TAs what the difference in that class size means to them specifically.

And there's two or three people more in those beginning classes, and to have 23 people in a beginning French class is ludicrous. You can't do anything. I mean, it's just a, the kind of teaching you're going to be doing is, uh, is not real good. You just can't deal with that many people. I have 17 in a 4-semester class. And I just, five of them were gone today. Some were taking tests, and some were doing something else. And that 12 was so nice. And I just felt better about the class that they got a chance to speak, and I did a better job.

LS: Does, could the TAA consider having different size classes for different size, for different kinds of sections, for instance?

KG: That was, that was brought up too because, well, because I was part of the bargaining team, and this was when I was bargaining in '74-'75. A lot of, I kind of scoped the old language departments, and they said, Krinske like said, well, okay, that's for you, and we understand your language program, it's really a 00:53:00problem. But how about a discussion section, where people ask questions if they want to? If not, you don't, it's kind of supplementary to a lecture is what we do in the language departments, we teach the course, and we're solely responsible for it.

LS: Yes.

KG: So we thought of well bargaining things, you know, differently. But that gets to be really tricky too because, uh, than in those departments where there isn't a strong affiliate, they might vote in a really high class size or something else might happen. So I think when you get into making decisions by department, it's, it's dangerous. We had something, one of the proposals for the next bargaining session was, um, a practicum, which is that in certain departments, there aren't a lot of TA appointments, which means there aren't a lot of undergrad courses that are taught by TAs, but there's a sizable number of graduate students. So they don't get a chance to teach, so it's not in their records, so they're less qualified for a job. And one of the things they wanted to do was have a, uh, methods program.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: And, uh, part of the methods program would be teaching a course, but it wouldn't be, fall in the realm of what a teaching assistant did. So it wasn't a TA. So they were making an exception on this basis in this department that somebody could do something.

LS: What department was it?

KG: It was political science. And we haven't, you know, voted it down or for it yet, whether it is going to be a proposal. And like I can really sympathize with their, with their problem, but I think it could create a lot of loopholes that could be really dangerous. And they try to put a lot of safeguards on it. Oh, I remember the decision, yes.

They tried to put a lot of safeguards in it as far as numbers, and when we voted on it at the last membership meeting, I guess we did vote it there would be a proposal at bargaining, but that if any, that if the language was changed, we would not vote for it because if you change it at all, it would weaken it, and it could be, you know, a big loophole to get into people teaching classes who 00:55:00weren't TAs.

They're, who worked third time, therefore, who didn't a living wage if, as if third time was a living wage. It's totally ludicrous. I, one of the things, uh, I remember in the French Department, we went. We had filed a grievance on work loads because we felt that the second year classes, even if they an hour less a week, because they were an upper-level class and that the people had had more experience who were teaching them, and that it was not a privilege to teach an upper-level class but first-year TAs usually didn't.

And that involved a different kind of skill that we thought maybe even though they don't have the same amount of hours, but we could sure be the same scale. And we went through, the year before I left, we went through a whole grievance on that. And, uh, they came out with the statement that, well, we couldn't change the number, the percentage of appointments, and you'll just have to work with it. Just cut out things, which as a rule, you know, not too educationally 00:56:00sound. We don't have the money, so we'll just cut out what you're doing.

And I noticed that when I came back this year, that now they've completely reversed it. Now the second-year courses have a higher appointment than the first-year courses. And they argued all semester that the first-year courses took more time.

And so they, so we kind of won the grievance, and then the addition, now we're going to have to go back and file a grievance saying that the first two courses are as equal amount of time to the second-year courses because it's I think it's very difficult in a department to have two courses with different appointments because you should really, it should be equal. You should have the choice of taking a course without teaching a course and not saying, well, I can't teach that course because I'm going to get less money.

LS: Yeah.

KG: Which is neat, because it, they should be the same, that one hour, that second year courses are one hour less a week, but you have more experience, so they should be the same. But now they put the first-year courses less than the second. It's just ludicrous. I couldn't believe it when I found out. I would go 00:57:00back and file a grievance using their arguments.

LS: Who was responsible?

KG: I don't know. It happened last year when I was gone, and this, or last semester, I wasn't here either. But there are two or three percentage points difference too, I think, which makes about $20 a month. And when you clear about 200, $20 is important. What I wanted to say was one of the things we did in the French Department, when we were filing this grievance, another part of it was that we wanted to kind of make a livable wage out of it, and we spoke to the faculty about the possibility of getting halftimes. Well, they're worried about halftimes because if they, if the TAs have halftimes, then there'll be fewer TAs.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: Every, if you, but think, you gave everyone a quarter time, which you can, there would be obviously a lot more students, graduate students, but they would have, not enough support to live on. So we said, look, this is what we make. Now could you, could anyone live on that? So you can't really keep us here like 00:58:00that. Give us halftime so at least the few people who are here, and it's not that few, but we have enough to live on. And big, basic fear was that there would be fewer grad students in their own classes. So there aren't that many halftimes appointments in French. But I have a 37, 37% appointment, I think, something like that. And, uh, I clear, when tuition is deducted, $200 a month.

LS: But tuition is deducted? They've stopped the --

KG: It takes, well, it's deducted off your salary. I mean, it looks really good by gross, you know, $450, wow. That's not bad for, you know, 37% appointment. But they take $160 tuition out. And we still have to pay tuition. We pay $1,000 tuition a year.

LS: I thought that, is that [word unclear]? I thought that was rescinded.

KG: Well, no. One of the things, just one of the basic things we were negotiating with before on wages was that, okay, we'll take the tuition out 00:59:00first, and give us lower salaries so we're in a lower tax bracket. But essentially then, we're paying the taxes on that tuition.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: So we're paying taxes on it too. And you end up with six out of nine months of the year, you're making $200, and you can't live on $200. No, you know, no way, so a lot of people are on food stamps, and it's, it's demeaning, and I don't think that's an exaggeration.

LS: Tell me how it is that you earn money on your own time?

KG: Oh, well, um, before, let's see, the two years I was here, I just had a teaching assistance, and what I did was I worked a lot in the summer. I worked for my father this summer and earned pretty good salary. And, uh, I couldn't stay here during the summer, so I couldn't take the courses that were offered in the summertime because I just couldn't afford to. So I just went home. And then this year, I decided when I came back that I'm interested in French, and I'm interested in going on in my degree, but there are certain things I'm not going to sacrifice.

And I will not live that lifestyle again. It's, when you reach a certain age, 01:00:00I'm 26, and, you know, when you don't have a car, when you don't have a decent apartment, and you can't ever go out, and, you know, you don't have any money, it's depressing. And I wasn't willing to sacrifice that anymore. So I decided that, well, if I want to continue, I'm going to have to find something that I can do so I can earn money. And, uh, because I am a licensed real estate broker in the state of North Dakota through --

LS: That's what your father does, is it?

KG: That's what he does, and he has a corporation, and he wanted someone to have a license in case anything happened to him because sales people would still be employed. So one summer I spent all summer studying for the exam and took the exam. And I got the idea last semester, somebody, I was going to sublet somebody's apartment, and it fell through.

So I thought, well, what am I going to do? I have to fly back here to find an apartment, and then bring all my stuff. It was a real, you know, hassle. So I thought, well, let's apply for a job as a resident manager. So I wrote 100 letters to all the different real estate companies in Madison. And I got a pretty good job, which means that I spend, in the wintertime, about 20 hours a 01:01:00week on it.

LS: What's the job?

KG: It's a resident manager of a 64-unit apartment complex. And I do, I am, I kind of do everything. I do shoveling, and the cleaning, and the rent collection, and the, I have -- and then, I'm paid a salary, and I make, um, $400 a month doing that.

LS: Oh, I see, in addition to getting free room --

KG: No, no, I get $400, and I pay my rent. I have to pay my rent.

LS: Oh.

KG: Which is probably more. I mean, the apartment, having two bedroom in it's really nice, and I probably wouldn't have that nice of an apartment if I, it wasn't connected with the job. But, uh, so my rent is $190. So I clear about $200 out of that and then about $200 on my TA, and I can make it okay. But I would not have come back if I wouldn't have found something else to do.

LS: Yeah.

KG: Because I just can't imagine what, you know, what you could do with $200 a month, especially not rents have gone up so much, and I was on food stamps one 01:02:00year, and I really didn't like that too much, going into the grocery store and paying with food stamps. It was just not a real good [words unclear].

LS: How do you manage your other expenses then, or does, do the food stamps take care of enough of what --

KG: That's what I used to have them when I was just had my TA salary.

LS: Yeah.

KG: I had food stamps, but now I don't because I have a sufficient income to --

LS: No, I meant how did you, but I assume --

KG: Yeah, yeah, well, I had food stamps, and then, uh, I had saved some money, but it was still a, my TA salary just about paid my rent. I mean, when I was making, clearing about $145, and my rent was $125. So, you know, you paid for your phone, and then you got food stamps for food, and tried to save some other money. But it was real curtailed of, you know, curtailment of activities. There's not a lot you could do, and I couldn't possibly afford to have a car.

LS: Is it trouble, is it difficult to get on the food stamp program?

KG: Well, we were really good about publicizing it. I, most of the French 01:03:00Department was at the Dane County Social Services, but it's, it's not too bad, and they're really, they're really nice about giving them to TAs, and they don't consider you're a student, etc. They consider that you're employed, and they deduct, you know, a certain percentage for your rent, etc. And, uh, I think if you had the halftime, you probably don't qualify. I'm not sure. But at a third time, you know, you do, I'm, you did. I'm not really sure what the qualifications are now, but I know some TAs in French are on food stamps still.

LS: How many do you think? I mean, what proportion?

KG: I really don't know. I think some people might get other help or whatever. I could, I don't know what is, but I'm sure there are several.

LS: Five or six or so.

KG: Something like that. Before, there was about ten. But again, you know, when you, after you, you know, when you've reached a certain age to be on, you know, to do something like that is --

LS: Yes, of course.

KG: I think it's asking a lot of sacrifices for you. And besides, you know, we're fulfilling a job, we have a job, you know. And we're providing the 01:04:00university with pretty cheap labor for, you know, instruction. So there's a limit to how much they can ask you to do.

LS: Uh-huh. What's your, what's your dissertation subject?

KG: Well, I'm, I did my master's in French, which is literature basically, and then last year, I had a Fulbright, and I was teaching English in high school, junior high school in France. And I took a leave of absence last semester to earn some money. Um, then when I came back this semester, I decided to switch departments. So I'm now doing a doctorate in curriculum instruction, which is French education.

LS: Oh, I see.

KG: So I still have a year and a half of classes left. I'll probably be taking prelims in April '78. So I'm not, I haven't taken prelims yet.

LS: What are you preparing yourself for then?

KG: Well, basically, what I'd like to do is get a job teaching in a college, 01:05:00supervising teaching assistants or beginning [words unclear] program development, curriculum development, that sort of thing.

LS: Hmm. So you're out of the French literature field then.

KG: Yes. I'm taking, well, I'm taking some courses in French now, but most of the courses I'm taking are in education. But I'm still a French TA.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: So --

LS: We're getting towards the end of the tape. Well -- how much are you aware of some of the issues that have been on campus such as the, the Math Research Center and the, uh, merger?

KG: Well, I remember the merger question coming up, but I'm not too familiar with it.

LS: You, that, that sort of went over --

KG: I guess, not being from Wisconsin, I think has a lot to do with it too. I think the people who are TAs or students who are from Wisconsin, who have been 01:06:00to some of the, you know, the other universities have, have, you know more opinions about it. It sounds like a, it's not a super idea. I don't know. It's a kind of a hedge move sort of thing, get a monopoly of all the, a lot of administration concentrated in one area, I'm not sure is a really good idea.

LS: But you didn't feel strongly about it, not something the TAA would take up as a cause?

KG: I think it's been discussed in the TAA. I couldn't, you know, give you any specific, uh, what their opinion on it was. I just am not that, that familiar with it.

LS: Did you know Marketti, by the way? Did you ever know --

KG: The name sounds familiar, but, no.

LS: But you've never met him?

KG: No.

LS: He was an interesting figure. And since he isn't around --

KG: He was very popular, yeah.

LS: Yeah. Well, I don't know, do you have anything else?

KG: Uh, well, you had mentioned before, talking, something about the French Department. I think the French Department is one of the, the departments where there's good cooperation. If you're in chemistry, and you're a member of the TAA, you're already on a black list.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: And they get called in and said, uh, you know, if you're going to, if I see you talking to someone else about the union, you're probably going to lose your RA or whatever. But in French, it's been a real good tradition of cooperation, and I had, when I was elected president, some of the, you know [words unclear] came up to the French Department and said, well, I'm glad it's, it's got to be somebody. I'm glad it's you. But, you know, I think we'll --

LS: That's nice.

KG: Yeah, it was really, it was a good feeling, but we'll be able to [word unclear] a few.

LS: What professors had come up to you and say that?

KG: Well, some of the, they had a lot of problems dealing with Phyllis, I think, because Phyllis is real blatant and militant, and I'm a little more soft spoken than she is. And she would be, you know, come out really and say exactly what she felt whether it kind of hedged around immature, but that was one of the 01:08:00feelings that they --

LS: But which professors came to you?

KG: Um, well, Herb, I think, Herb Gotchburg, who was a chair. He mentioned something about, you know, congratulating me on winning, and that we would be able to work together, which, uh, it's, I guess it's a good feeling. It's, I don't feel at all threatened.

LS: Uh-huh.

KG: I never feel, like if I'm going into department about class size or something, I feel like I have a right to do that and that it's going to be, you know, I don't feel like I'm sneaking around for information or something like that. I feel that it's, you know, it's available, and they're going to give it to me, and if I have a problem, then I can talk to them about it.

LS: Which departments would you think are, you mentioned chemistry, what --

KG: Well, chemistry is very reactionary.

LS: And what are some of the others that you've --

KG: Well, math is pretty good. Math is a, I think it's pretty good because they have a pretty high percentage. And the more, higher percentage you have of TAs who are members of the union means that, uh, you're kind of part of the majority.

LS: More accepted [word unclear] yes.

KG: Yeah. Uh --