Adjunct faculty represented at DC public hearing

Maria Maisto, President, New Faculty Majority

Maria Maisto, President, New Faculty Majority

Maria Maisto, president of New Faculty Majority, was in Washington, D.C. yesterday to represent adjunct faculty from around the country at an IRS public hearing regarding establishing guidelines for calculating the work hours of part-time faculty.

The hearing was held in response to the Affordable Care Act, which mandates that as of Jan. 1, 2014, large employers must provide health insurance for employees who work 30 hours per week or more.

The Ohio Part-Time Faculty Association, in conjunction with NFM, collected information about how colleges and universities have cut the course loads of part-time faculty in order to avoid providing health care to adjuncts.

In an April 23, 2013, op-ed on Take Part titled “There’s Something Sneaky Going on at Colleges Across America,” Maisto decries higher education’s efforts to employ legal loopholes and manipulate definitions of faculty work in order to avoid complying with the ACA. Yahoo News also picked up her piece.

The Chronicle of Higher Education’s coverage of the hearing included testimony from Maisto that called for parity between part-time and tenured and tenure-track professors when determining work hours for adjuncts.

In March, the Department of the Treasury and the IRS collected 380 comments on the issue of Shared Responsibility for Employers Regarding Health Coverage (REG-138006-12). Included among them were a comment from David Wilder, Co-Chair of the Organizing Committee of OPTFA and comments from NFM‘s Maisto.

One comment

  1. Fred Burg says:

    I have been exchanging info with Paula Maggio of the Ohio PT Faculty Association and reviewed, at least briefly, some of the info/links she provided. One comment I made does NOT seem to have been addressed. In particular:

    I’m wondering if the point I touched on in my original email to NFM – that is, that adjuncts may already have health benefits from a previous (or current) employer – is mentioned anywhere in that material. My review did not show that. Perhaps you can point me specifically where this is brought to the attention of the hearing before the Dept. of the Treasury.

    If this point has NOT been raised, are there opportunities to do so before a Final Ruling?

    Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *