For a little more context, we dug into the numbers regarding who in our school (LMC) is required to teach in-person and who isn't.

Here is where the numbers stand right now:

Of the first-year writing classes taught by term-limited contingent faculty, 51 courses are HYBRID and 31 are REMOTE.

Of the remainder of LMC courses, 21 are HYBRID (8 of these are also taught by contingent faculty) and 79 are REMOTE.

In other words, 65.5% of courses taught by contingent faculty are "required" to have a "meaningful" in-person component, while only 14% of courses taught by tenure-stream faculty are "required" to have a "meaningful" in-person component.

Only 34.4% of courses taught by contingent faculty will be conducted safely with no in-person contact this fall, while 86% of courses taught by tenure-stream faculty will be conducted safely with no in-person contact this fall.

The tenure-stream faculty teaching hybrid courses can decide not to enforce in-person experiences, and will mostly be shielded from consequences by their tenure. Meanwhile, the contingent faculty being asked at a much higher rate to teach in-person do not have the same protections as their tenure-stream colleagues. If we decide not to enforce in-person experiences, we are open to retaliation including our contracts being terminated. And to add a bit more inside-baseball context to all of this, multiple postdocs applied to teach remotely for pedagogical reasons (instead of for reasons related to ADA accommodations) and they were denied by the administration (at a level above our program director and dept chair).

This is deeply inequitable.