The CBC

I’m seeing a lot of Canadian Conservatives make claims about the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) being “funded by the Liberals.” In fact, it has existed as a Crown Corporation since 1936 through every single Liberal AND Conservative government. Such people might also be interested to know that it broadcasts just as many Pierre Poilievre (Conservative leader) ads and excerpts from speeches/interviews as anything else. Speaking of Conservatives, why is Alberta Premier Danielle Smith asking Donald Trump for help in getting Poilievre elected? She might as well skip the middle man and ask for Russia’s, China’s, and/or India’s foreign interference more directly.

The Canadian Federal Budget

CBC News Network is constantly interrupted by ads telling me that my government health insurance doesn’t cover enough and Kurt Browning telling me that as a homeowner 55 or older (only one of those things is true for me) I should get a reverse mortgage to help pay for things.

A federal budget is always going to be a compromise, but increasing funding for the CBC, keeping on track with moves towards universal dental care and pharmacare, improving the situation of affordable housing, and paying for various things by increasing taxes on the wealthiest 1% seem perfectly sensible to me.

I’m not completely happy with the Liberal government, and it is the NDP that has helped get certain things done. Meanwhile, Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives are being totally disingenuous about addressing affordability. Yes, the carbon tax is a challenging scenario, but please do not let them make that the only election issue. We’ll be very sick of hearing about it long before the fall of 2025.

Discussion of “Class Struggle” (about part-time university instructors)

Re the CBC’s Most university undergrads now taught by poorly paid part-timers (includes an embedded player of the radio documentary):

Having a large part-time workforce of adjunct instructors is not an unfortunate consequence of under-funding universities.  It is a planned consequence of higher education trying to sustain too many programs, taking in too many students, and having way more non-faculty employees (administrators, etc.) than it has tenure-track and tenured faculty members.  Pat Rogers (of Wilfrid Laurier University) and Ken Coates (of the University of Saskatchewan, formerly of the University of Waterloo) have basically given up on higher education actually being for education.  “Saving money” for student residence climbing walls and whirlpools is now the priority, even though money is not actually saved, because of hiring a new administrator for every little thing.

The “statistic” about an adjunct (a.k.a., contingent, sessional, etc.) instructor making $28,000 to $45,000 a year for teaching the same number of courses (four) as a faculty member making $80,000-$150,000 is misleading.  Most adjunct faculty do not teach full-time:  I typically made around $16,500 for three courses per year.  Even as a Visiting Assistant Professor, I only made $22,000 for four courses.  Maybe things are different in STEM (Science-Technology-Engineering-Math), but adjunct instructors and faculty members in most disciplines simply do not make the kind of money indicated.  Also, numerous Ph.D.s eventually leave academia and become things like school bus drivers, real estate agents, yoga instructors, and welfare recipients.  Some of us also publish books and articles, present papers at academic conferences, and so on, but none of that provides a living wage.  Writing usually works out to less than minimum wage (not to mention that it’s only a part-time venture), and, in fact, presenting at conferences costs money.  Usually, it’s just faculty members who can get conference travel funds.

Most adjunct instructors continue to hold out hope for landing permanent academic positions, and they thus resist saying much about their circumstances of low pay, limited or no office use, no benefits, no pensions, and so on.  Conversely, most tenured and tenure-track professors won’t go on record on this issue, either, because they would almost invariably appear to be unsympathetic.  So, documentaries such as this one end up having to interview administrators, even though the over-hiring and over-prioritizing of them is one of the main problems in higher education today.  If you don’t believe that this is an issue, see also the Huffington Post’s New Analysis Shows Problematic Boom In Higher Ed Administrators.