Although I formally retired this past summer, I am, nevertheless, continuing to teach this term, as you of course know. This large course (with 142 students enrolled) consistsing of three lecture hours and three discussion sections, is considered to be a teaching load equivalent to two three-credit-hour courses. My plan for this academic year was to teach this course in the Fall and a thermodynamics course in the Spring, altogether the equivalent of a half-time load. During each of the last two academic years I taught at the same half-time rate, that is, a total of nine contact hours during the year.

      At this time I am in conflict with the dean of sciences, Christine Armett-Kibel, who has drawn up a contract to pay me $9,999.91 for teaching this course, an offer unacceptable to me. I wrote to her on 9/22/97 indicating that $12,573.80 for this course (and $6,286.90 for the Thermodynamics course) was within the amount allowed by state law, and amounted to $15,170.85 less than I received last year for equivalent work. A reply from her dated 9/24 was a simple rejection in which she asserted that the amount offered me was based on two policies. The matter is now in dispute.

      The issue for me is the arrogance and greed of the administrators, who treat part-time faculty in a disgraceful manner. Christine Kibel is not satisfied to have me do the same work for $15 thousand less than I got last year. She wants me to do it for $19 thousand less, the better to line the pockets of the administrators.

      If you have not already done so, I ask you to read my short paper, Greed 102: Screwing the Students and Part Time Faculty. It explains the arithmetic of exploitation as applied not to relatively privileged part-timers like me, but to part-time teachers for whom the income is crucially important.

      It's immediate impact on you will be limited. Normally I have had the help of a teaching assistant who shared with me the task of reading and commenting on the critical book reviews. We would each read half, and I would read, in addition to two book reviews per student, all the final course critiques. My intention now is to not read any papers until and unless the dean and I reach agreement. Until then, for each paper you submit, I will either (1) simply enter in my records the book you reviewed and return your paper, or (2) if I have an assistant, give half the reviews to the assistant to be read and commented on, and treat the other half as in (1). In the event that the disagreement is not resolved, I will assign a grade of A to each of you who has submitted each of the required five papers in acceptable form. In this way your grade--and the absurdly important grade-point average--will not suffer.

      Needless to say, the rest of the course will be unaffected. I will welcome feedback from you--any comments you wish to make.