Before I start, I would like to note that this comes from the perspective of a resident assistant (RA) who worked the 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 school years, and was not published earlier for fear of retaliation. This letter also by no means encapsulates the experience felt by all RAs. This comes from my perspective, which is limited by my own experience and does not address racism and some of the other types of ableism felt by other employees of HRL, nor the other injustices faced by other student employees.
I would also like to note that RAs receive compensation in the form of room and board. We do not receive any paychecks or actual money. Because our housing is tied to our employment, any RA who cannot afford or does not qualify for on-campus housing will lose housing in a matter of days if they are fired or choose to quit. Because of the high cost of living in Seattle, as well as the steep tuition, this means many RAs have no choice but to work, no matter the conditions. I was on the verge of quitting several times throughout this year, but I chose not to for fear of losing my access to housing. Additionally, because we do not make a formal wage, as well as Seattle University’s previous success in blocking and retaliation against unionization attempts, RA unionization is very difficult at Seattle U.
I had been an RA during the 2023-2024 school year and overall enjoyed it. I loved talking to all my residents and throwing events that they would enjoy. Cracks began to appear in the job though, when I was rehired for the 2024-2025 school year. Instead of a contract, RAs were given an “Expectations and Practices” document, meaning we weren’t provided the same protections we had in the past. The document also specified that each shift we worked would be three hours longer, starting at 5:00 p.m. instead of 8:00 p.m. with no additional compensation or benefits. This meant several RAs were forced to give up or limit the hours they worked at other jobs. The associate director of community engagement and learning initiatives had been hired earlier that year and met with some of the RAs to address our concerns. She plainly told us that the document was not a discussion and we were welcome to not accept the position. In her answers to clarifying questions, it also became clear that she did not fully grasp the concept of our shifts, which would become even more apparent later on.
The 2024-2025 school year began with Formation, a three-week full-time training session for RAs. We were notified during formation that in fall quarter alone, we would be hosting twice the number of events as we had each quarter in previous years, but with the same budget. We were also expected to completely design and partially research each bulletin board we made. Once again, all of these changes had been made without informing any of the RAs and without increasing any of our compensation or benefits. At the end of Formation, we were given a brief survey to fill out. However, each question on the survey only asked for positive feedback, with questions like “What was your favorite part of Formation?” or “What would you like to see more of at next year’s Formation?”
The HRL Central Office staff did, however, mention that they were working on an advisory committee so that they could hear HRL student employee feedback. Several RAs, including myself, applied to the committee, while other RAs, discouraged by the previous discussions with the associate director, did not apply. The committee ended up being canceled, with assurances that they would try again in winter quarter. Unsurprisingly, they never did. I really liked the idea of an advisory committee, so I asked my supervisor to meet with the associate director so I could give feedback from myself and my team. At the end of winter quarter, I met with her, but I was told that I must have a piece of positive feedback for each piece of constructive feedback. None of the constructive feedback led to any results. I was reminded that the HRL Central Office staff would listen to what I had to say, but not to expect anything to change. However, when I was told to do additional work outside of my “Expectations and Practices” document, even when I was sick with pneumonia or COVID-19, I was expected to do so promptly.
Throughout all of this, I had been dealing with the recent diagnoses of several chronic illnesses as well as other unknown health problems. On shifts, RAs walk through the residence halls in their part of campus. For me, this included three buildings and a number of stairs. I was struggling with the number of stairs, so I requested several accommodations meant to reduce the number of stairs I was expected to climb without limiting safety checks or placing additional burdens on my coworkers. Both of my supervisors, as well as my Disability Services coordinator, agreed that these would likely be reasonable accommodations, but required approval from the associate director. Whether out of retaliation or out of misunderstanding of what it means to be an RA at Seattle U, the associate director not only denied my accommodation requests, but also changed the shifts so that RAs would check every floor in pairs, doubling the number of stairs I was expected to do. This meant that I was faced with deciding whether to continue working as an RA, working an average of two shifts a week that would make my symptoms worse, or quit, paying an exorbitant amount of money that I didn’t have to live in Seattle for the few remaining months until I graduate. Student employees should not be forced to choose between housing and health while enrolled at Seattle U. While being an RA requires certain physical demands, those physical demands were increased midway through the year in response to an accommodation request. By doing this, HRL was signaling that they did not care enough to support their disabled staff. Without disabled RAs, residents with disabilities will have fewer advocates and fewer people who understand navigating college with a disability. This means limiting student and staff diversity, one of the core values that Seattle U prides itself on.
HRL, much like the rest of the Seattle U administration, loves to uphold its activist image. Unfortunately, that image only goes as far as convenience and profit. All Jesuit ideals of social justice are abandoned as soon as they threaten the administration’s ability to control its faculty and staff. I ask that as students, staff and faculty, we hold Seattle U accountable for their actions. Despite its lip service, the administration across Seattle U somehow always forgets its most crucial role: supporting us in our quest for a more just and humane world.
To read the perspective of other RAs and HRL, click here.
