Undergraduates expressed solidarity with the Stanford Graduate Workers Union (SGWU) amid a tumultuous week for union-University relations. Last week, the SGWU voted to authorize a strike, which was originally set to begin Tuesday, that was called off after the union and the University reached a tentative agreement Tuesday evening.
Many undergraduate students, whose classes are often staffed by graduate students, argued the University should meet the union’s demands and echoed their affordability concerns.
Andrew Song ’25 said there are inconsistencies between the University’s claims that it paid graduate workers fair wages and its report, which was based on a 2022 student expenses survey. The report found that found that “74% of doctoral students experienced financial stress while at Stanford” and 23% reported that “they ran short of money and tried to make their food or food money last longer” in the last 30 days.
Song also cited an SGWU member’s claim that Stanford’s calculations of graduate students’ food budgets was 23% lower than the cost of eating at the University’s own dining halls.
The University has stressed that its minimum salaries for graduate workers are higher than peer institutions, including the Ivy League schools. SWGU has countered that the cost of living at Stanford is significantly higher than at other universities, citing the Very Low Income Level (VLIL) metric of each metropolitan area as defined by the Department of Housing & Urban Development.
The University, however, has claimed that VLILs are “a measure of relative income, not costs” and that an accurate cost-of-living assessment begins with “monetizing” Stanford’s benefits, such as subsidized housing. The University maintains that it is ultimately difficult to make such an assessment “since the value of benefits varies depending on the individual student’s situation.”
Several students said the University’s comparisons to Ivy League schools and its definition of “accurate” cost-of-living assessments are excuses to avoid meeting union demands.
“I think it’s kind of a cop out for the University to say, look at us, we’re doing better than the other universities,” said Mandarava Kaiya Jamyangling-Kawaguchi ’27. “Because the bottom line is, even if you’re doing better than other places, if it’s not enough for the people who it’s affecting, which would be the graduate students, it’s just not enough.”
Neev Kamal Seedani ’28 said the University has hyper-analyzed on minor aspects of SGWU’s claims.
“What I’m seeing here is Stanford saying, ‘Hey, we don’t care about these other metrics because they’re not relevant directly to how we calculate stipends and support,’” Seedani said. “Which, again, is a way of dodging the actual concern here, which is that living around Stanford is a lot more expensive.”
University spokesperson Luisa Rapport did not respond directly to the undergraduates’ criticisms. In an email to The Daily, Rapport instead cited resources, including cost-of-living calculations, on the University’s Graduate Student Unionization website.
The University has also claimed that meeting the union’s demands would reduce available research funds.
Most undergraduates said that even if research funds were reduced, it’s more important to raise graduate workers’ wages.
“I’d rather, for me, have less Research Fellowships available if that means people can eat,” Song said.
Seedani cited the University’s endowment as a potential source of additional funding. Seedani said Stanford has more money “to draw on that they don’t want to draw on, because at the end of the day, Stanford is a business.”
Stanford reinvests much of the endowment income to support future University costs, and certain rules also restrict how endowment funds can be used. However, Song said the University could still raise wages.
“I know the endowment goes different ways, but I find it hard to believe [that the University cannot raise graduate wages]. If there’s a will, there’s a way. We’re not running an economy here.”
“The University is probably spending a lot of money in other areas where they could reduce that spending and instead prioritize research and teaching, because that’s what a university is for,” Madary said.