No retaliation against strikers

Earlier this week, I participated in the latest noise demonstration in support of the IU Strike. We marched through campus to raise awareness about the imminent strike on campus.

While I was pleasantly surprised by the accuracy of the Indiana Daily Student article about the demonstration, “Protesters raise concerns about state funding, tuition,” I was disappointed to find the article did not describe the full length of our protest.

Monday’s noise demonstration did not merely end with us marching to the provost’s office, but instead with the majority of protesters entering Provost Lauren Robel’s office and confronting her with our demands.

In particular, we were attempting to extract a promise from Robel that faculty and staff participating in the strike would not face retaliation from the administration.

Those of us planning the strike have understood from the beginning that retaliation against strikers is a serious concern.

This is why our list of demands includes as its final point, “no retaliation for participating in or organizing the strike.”

Undergraduate students have a privileged position in this regard. They are unlikely to face any notable consequences for abandoning class in favor of the strike.

The strike, however, has not been organized exclusively by undergraduate students and has never been conceived of as addressing only their concerns. We are as angry about the wage freeze for IU employees as we are about tuition hikes. We know that the pressure of student debt is as painful for graduate students as it is for undergraduates.

This is why we marched to Robel’s office. Faculty and staff have as much at stake in the strike effort as undergraduates, but it is the former who are most threatened by retaliation. This is not an idle threat. The administration has already made moves to quash participation in the strike by faculty.

Two weeks ago, Executive Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences Larry Singell sent an email to all faculty in the college warning them that using their university email addresses to organize around the strike was prohibited.

Singell was forced to withdraw that statement after the circulation of a letter in defense of faculty rights signed by 46 professors.

The only appropriate response to intimidation and retaliation from the administration is to stand together in solidarity while refusing to back down.

We were unable to reach an accord with Robel. She continually refused to promise that there would be no retaliation for participation in the strike.

She insisted that a moral decision to strike without the potential for consequences would be an empty gesture.

Apparently, in the provost’s eyes, if you threaten someone into submission, that reflects on the other person’s moral character and not your own.

As we left the provost’s office, we promised that if there was retaliation against any striker we would return in larger numbers.

We stand by that promise. Anyone who wants to strike but feels scared by the administration should know we will stand by you and do whatever is necessary to protect you.

­— atcrane@indiana.edu