In a column published Sept. 30, Brian McFillen ("Unionizing the Graduates," IDS) voiced his concern with the recent effort by some sociology graduate employees to meet with our colleagues about the prospects for improving our working conditions. Before addressing that concern, I want to applaud McFillen for initiating this dialogue in the IDS. Over the coming months, I hope that all interested parties (including the administration, faculty and students) will use the IDS as one forum to discuss opportunities that will enhance the working conditions of graduate employees.\nTo that end, many of the issues and concerns related to organizing will be discussed in time and through an open, deliberative process. My colleagues in the sociology department are not of one mind, and I expect much of the same from my fellow graduate employees in other departments. Currently, there is still a need for exploring other graduate employee's opinions regarding the possibilities for improvement. Thus far, efforts have targeted soliciting input from graduate employees. This input has strongly supported the idea of having such a discussion. \nMoreover, a few principles have guided this discussion. \nFirst, we are committed to the welfare of both current and future graduate employees. Under no circumstances would we consider forming an organization that harms graduate students, present or future. Fostering improvements in our working conditions does not entail a loss of resources for other areas of the University. In fact, it can benefit everyone. In the 1980s, the Graduate Employee Association, while short-lived, was instrumental in achieving health care coverage for graduate students. We want a permanent organization that builds on this success.\nSecond, our focus is on addressing the concerns of graduate employees, not with making an immediate decision about the specific form of the organization. While McFillen dwells on unions, other possibilities will be investigated through open, civil and constructive discussion. In short, we need a collective voice to articulate our needs as graduate employees, similar to the service that the GPSO provides graduate students.\nThird, improvement is attainable. Its that simple. Our counterparts in the Big Ten -- Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan State, Iowa and Purdue -- have demonstrated that graduate employees who organize responsibly can achieve better benefits; so can Indiana. \nRecently, a diverse group of graduate employees, representing 15 departments, gathered to share their ideas and experiences. These employees voiced their concerns about a number of issues, including the lack of dental insurance, the scheduling mismatch between University fees and University paychecks, as well as the inordinate cost of health care for dependents.\nIf there's a lesson to be learned from the Ivy League schools, it's that inclusive participation from the University community is a necessary condition for improving graduate employees' working conditions. Because no department exists in a vacuum, we need and welcome a diverse collection of graduate employees. I'm confident that this participation will be achieved in the coming months, and I look forward to a broad discussion about these issues.
Kyle Dodson\nGraduate employee in the sociology department
