On July 1st, 2025, Harvard unilaterally carved out nearly 1,000 student workers from their union eligibility.

On this page, you’ll find testimonials from student workers across campus about Harvard’s decision.
If you or someone you know has been affected by the carveout, sign on to our open letter!
And you can submit your testimonial here.

---

“The carving out of over a thousand graduate workers is only possible in the current political environment, where Harvard can take advantage of the turmoil and uncertainty to avoid recourse for this illegal and unfair labor practice. I grew up in the Heartland of our country, and I directly benefited from my family’s membership in a trade union, which afforded me the socioeconomic mobility to attend graduate school. As a Midwesterner, loyalty to my friends and allies has been instilled in me from a young age. I chose Harvard because I believed that the most prestigious university in the world, in the most American city in the world, could and would uphold the values that enabled the most prosperous post-war middle class ever seen and would be loyal to its graduate workers. Instead, I have watched our leadership posture and virtue signal, sending us long, winding paragraphs about how they are standing up to the government with no tangible action to support graduate workers. They tell us they are creating new departments, offices, and initiatives that they claim will protect our interests; however, they merely create new administrative positions. In the same breath, Harvard representatives will inform us during contract negotiations that fair wages are not feasible and that graduate workers must continue to be paid below the poverty level, despite having an endowment exceeding $53,000,000,000. We fundamentally live in a society and a world that we create: there is no a priori reason Harvard is unable to compensate the people who make this university great fairly. It is now clear to me that the administration’s primary interest is in protecting itself and maximizing the efficient extraction of labor from graduate workers. Perhaps it was naïve of me to have expected anything else.

I applied for the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship (GRFP) to support my research. I observe supermassive black holes millions of light-years away that are burping as they finish consuming their meal of a star that got a little too close. I combine signals from telescopes across the world to create a synthetic telescope the size of our globe. Such a telescope, located in Boston, would be capable of imaging a dime in Los Angeles and measuring its position to an accuracy of less than the width of a human hair. Had I been awarded the GRFP, I would no longer be eligible for union membership, according to Harvard. Fundamentally, nothing would have changed about my labor as a graduate worker had I been awarded this prestigious fellowship. Instead, Harvard has created a new DIS-incentive to apply for external funding by refusing to allow their most high-achieving students to benefit from union protections.” —Will Golay, G3 in Astrophysics

“I needed reconstructive orthopedic surgery this year. My membership in the union supported me both financially and emotionally through the recovery. Because of my membership, I was never in fear of repercussions for prioritizing my health, as I knew the union would defend me. Financially, reimbursements from union funds allowed me to pay for equipment and medical care that greatly aided my recovery, despite them not being fully covered by insurance. Being carved out of the union because the services I do are not considered valuable labor is an extremely upsetting prospect. I have dedicated half of my 20s to pursuing biomedical research, and to be told that it is not valuable to the university that will benefit from my future grants, fellowships, IP, or patents, is extraordinarily disheartening.” — Ben, G2 in DMS

“The primary feeling I have in response to nearly 1,000 workers being carved out of our union is one of disbelief and deep concern. I struggle to understand why the university would take such an aggressive stance against its own students. Students who are here not only to learn, but also to contribute meaningful, often urgent research. My research focuses on the measles virus and how it produces proteins necessary for infection and dissemination. This is especially relevant now, as the U.S. faces its largest outbreak of measles since 1992. Harvard was the place I chose for this work because I believed it would support not only scientific inquiry, but also the people who carry it out. That belief is being tested. The union has played a vital role in securing the foundation that allows me to focus on research: emergency financial support, predictable pay, grievance procedures, and protections against overwork. Losing those protections means increased stress, uncertainty, and vulnerability, both academically and personally. It directly affects our ability to do our jobs well. What makes Harvard’s decision especially painful is that it contradicts the values the university has claimed to uphold. I was proud of how Harvard leadership stood up for students when the Trump administration targeted our colleagues. I believed that leadership understood the importance of protecting academic freedom and student worker rights. Now, it feels like that same leadership is using the anti-labor climate of the current administration as cover to quietly divide and weaken us from within. It’s not just disillusioning, it’s destabilizing. I still want to believe that Harvard values its students and workers. But that belief becomes harder to hold onto as leadership takes actions that suggest otherwise. These decisions aren’t abstract. They’re hurting our friends, colleagues, and the research we’re all here to pursue.” — Wesley Hanson, G4 in Virology

“I feel like I’ve been backstabbed and that Harvard is no better than the administration in the way they treat the scientists who work for them.” — G3 PhD Student

“I consider the union as my only advocate against Harvard. I’ve experienced medical emergencies and have received faster advice and assistance from the union than from the university officials. Another aspect – if you are in an PhD program, other U.S. universities won’t offer you a Ph.D position. So, if you are an international student, Harvard exerts total control over your presence in the U.S. Even if you can convince your P.I., you are very limited in income sources, too. How can anyone negotiate with their only possible employer? There is nothing about TFing that changes my status as a Ph.D. candidate doing research in a lab. Even when I TF, it is a 10-hour/week task in a 100 hr/wk job. My pay changes by less than 10 percent, too. So why would that 10% change my status? Harvard exerts total control over my income and presence in the country. I can’t work if they say no. I can’t stay if they say no. The only party whose incentives align with mine, regardless of those 10 hours spent TFing, is the union of fellow graduate students. Simply put, graduate students turn money into papers. That’s our central relationship with the university. That unites all Ph.D. candidates together. Harvard’s TFing condition for the union is embarrassingly disingenuous. They won’t find a single P.I. that is OK with their Ph.D. students spending 40+ hours a week studying rather than doing research.” — G3 in SEAS

“It is terrifying to see my friends and colleagues lose their access to union benefits and fear for their future in graduate school. I myself fear being carved out and what that would mean for paying for medical expenses. I greatly value the comfort of knowing I can access union benefit funds if I need help paying for medical and dental expenses. Just this year I have had a number of unforeseen medical and dental issues for which I have used or plan to apply for benefits to help cover, as these expenses far exceed my budget I live by based on my graduate student stipend. I feel a great amount of stress around paying for these upcoming procedures that I need to have done and it does feel like it has reduced my ability to work effectively some days.” — Student Worker in DMS

“I was extremely upset and angry when I heard that I and most of my peers in OEB have been carved out of the union. The union has helped me financially and physically over the course of my PhD and I do not think I would have a sense of Harvard community without the union. Not only has the union helped me pay for dental each year, but they have been extremely kind and generous on two different occasions when I applied to the emergency benefits fund to help me handle unexpected vet bills. In particular, the union significantly helped me earlier this year when I was dealing with one of the worst moments of my life – my beloved cat Fig was unexpectedly diagnosed with widespread lymphoma, leaving me with $7,000 in vet bills from a single day of diagnostic imaging and the rapid passing of my sweet baby. I applied for emergency financial support from both the union and from the FAS emergency fund, and while FAS/Harvard told me they didn’t cover vet bills and couldn’t help me, the union stepped up and helped offset some of these unexpected and horrible costs, providing me significant financial and emotional support and even greater piece of mind when I was at my lowest. This allowed me to spend Fig’s final days being present with her rather than panicking about how I was going to cover what was the equivalent of a car down payment to be told my cat was dying of cancer. I will forever be grateful to the union for this and am angered that other student workers have now lost access to such emergency funds when they are at their lowest and most financially vulnerable. When I read that Harvard’s reason for carving us out of the union was because we “do not perform services for the university in exchange for compensation” (Judith Singer), it felt like a slap in the face. Harvard University does not believe our research to be work, to be something the University considers valuable enough to compensate. And yet Harvard’s reputation is built on research, on the backs of the very graduate students Harvard has decided to eliminate from the union. It feels underhanded that Harvard proclaims our research worthless while continuing to benefit from the status graduate student worker research provides.” — Sophie, G6 in OEB, studying plant physiology & anatomy

To treat an RA appointment as “not labor” is absurd. The physics department simply would not exist if there weren’t graduate students doing research and being paid as RAs. Without graduate researchers, professors would not have papers published, and thus would struggle to get funding. That funding keeps the lights on in the building and ultimately supports 90% of departmental operational costs in the physics department. Taking students out of the union creates a sense of uncertainty and fear that hard won raises could be stripped away and hard won workplace protections could be stripped away. This also impacts our ability to apply for benefit funds to cover out of pocket medical expenses. I have a lot of health conditions, and I typically spend close to $4,000 per year on out of pocket medical expenses. Being able to apply to the benefit pool made it possible for me to have access to weekly therapy. If I have to cover the co-pay on my own, I can’t afford to continue in weekly therapy. The cost of living is high in Boston, and I’ve only just gotten to a place of being somewhat financially stable because of union won raises and things like the benefit pool. I would also lose my access to the bike benefit. Given that I have to bike to campus everyday for my research, and the cost of bike maintenance can be quite high, having that benefit is really helpful. The vast majority of people in my physics department are paid through RA appointments, so this has a widespread impact. I also think it feels quite dishonest and suspicious that they have done so and not sent any official correspondence to anyone about it. It seems many people in my physics department (faculty and administrative people) still don’t understand what is going on or why this has happened. My specific research is within physics education research. This means I work closely with instructors and professors helping them to improve their teaching in undergraduate physics classes. Given Harvard’s commitment to high quality education for their undergraduate population, my research is closely aligned with the goals of the institution. To consider this important work as “not labor” is nonsensical.” — Ri Dresser, G6 in Physics

“It deeply saddens me to see nearly 1,000 workers carved out of the union, stripped of the safety nets they rely on: such as union representation, childcare, healthcare, dependent insurance, emergency funds, and many other essential benefits. These are not luxuries; they are promises made to us, and for many, they are lifelines that help keep ourselves and our families financially afloat. This decision is especially devastating given the already high cost of living in the Boston area. I know that many of the affected workers are now facing profound financial and emotional stress. These new burdens inevitably spill over into their academic lives, making it harder to focus on groundbreaking research and academic progress. As these workers are forced to navigate new obstacles, their capacity to continue the work they came to Harvard to do is diminished. Personally, I have relied heavily on these union-secured benefits. As a new father to a 9-month-old daughter, the childcare benefit has been critical for me. It allows me to focus on my research by providing access to more affordable childcare despite the extremely high cost of living in the greater Boston area. I have also used the emergency fund in moments of crisis, such as the death of my grandfather and a hospitalization in my immediate family. Without this support, the cost of emergency travel to visit family in critical moments would have created significant financial hardship. Harvard’s decision to exclude these workers from such protections and support systems is not just disappointing, I believe it’s deeply harmful. I know firsthand what it means to lean on these benefits in difficult times. To deny others that same support is to break a promise, and to leave many of our colleagues more vulnerable than ever. I am a graduate student researcher in the field of pharmacology at Harvard Medical School and my research focuses on using antibodies to study receptors that are therapeutically relevant. This research, provides a new understanding of how we can harness protein engineering of antibodies to innovate and develop new therapeutic strategies.” — G6 in Chemical Biology

As a graduate student conducting research at the intersection of mental health, ethics, and systemic healthcare inequities, I know firsthand how essential it is for our labor to be protected—regardless of where the funding comes from. The decision to carve out nearly 1,000 of our colleagues from the union feels like a targeted attempt to undermine our collective power and has left many of us feeling disposable and devalued. Union representation is not a luxury—it’s what ensures fair wages, protections against exploitation, and accountability from an institution as large as Harvard. I’ve personally benefited from the union’s advocacy, which has helped create safer, more equitable working and learning environments. For Harvard to claim its place as a global leader in education, justice, and research while stripping student workers of fundamental labor protections is not only hypocritical—it’s reprehensible. It reveals a deep disconnect between the institution’s public values and its treatment of the very people who carry forward its research and teaching mission. Our research IS labor. And any institution that truly values innovation and academic excellence must also value and protect the people behind it.” — LA, G4 in DCE

“My two young kids will be severely impacted, including my less than 1yo young kid who has been on medical support since birth. This is especially hard for a PhD student dad.” — G4 in Government

“I am a musicologist researching questions of music, nature, and climate change, and I’m also a proud organizer with HGSU. As someone working in a turf who is not eligible for benefits from the Union for the majority of my time at Harvard, despite my being a member, it is frustrating to see the University eroding the union’s power in this way: without meaningfully discussing the matter with HGSU, and with no regard for the material impacts it could have on workers’ lives. I have only been eligible for union benefits for a small portion of my time at Harvard, and it has been a great help to have access to benefits and representation in the event of workplace challenges. Harvard’s decision to carve out nearly 1000 workers means that these workers no longer have the option to benefit from HGSU’s support. But more existentially, it means that the University is refusing to acknowledge the full extent of the vital work we do as researchers and teachers, labor that helps maintain the University’s cutting edge status across many fields.” — Cana, G7 in Music

“It appears I have been carved out of the union because, for the first time after 4 semesters of heavy teaching loads (plus research and classes), I have won a fellowship that grants me a semester to focus only on research. Applying for fellowships is something my department and professors encourage us to do. But by carving me out of the union, Harvard is also effectively punishing me for winning the fellowship, both psychologically, by putting me on more unsure footing, and financially, as I will no longer have access to benefits. For example, the dental fund has been important to me in the last year as I had some unexpected dental problems that incurred high costs (despite my having dental insurance), and the dental fund covered these costs. There is still a possibility that I will need a root canal in the future. If I am so unlucky as to need it this fall, I will suddenly not have access to the benefit fund. Why? Because I won a fellowship! How does that make sense? Moving between research, teaching, and learning roles is a fundamental feature of academic jobs. By carving out students who are, for some time, doing one part of their job and not another, Harvard is not just devaluing our contributions and hard work but punishing us for moving through the natural rhythms of our jobs.” — G4 PhD Student

“I have definitely benefited from the union in the past with emergency fund used. Additionally, I don’t think I would be able to financially survive being a PhD without what the union has fought for in wages, health insurance, and dental insurance. Without this layer of the union, it is scary what the future holds and if I will be able to afford rent increases every year now without the support of the union.” — G2 in BBS

“Despite not being able to get involved, being in a union has meant so much to me! One moment that stands out is being able to reach out and speak to a union rep easily / quickly to strategize on how to help a friend / fellow student & union member facing health issues. They were so knowledgeable and helpful in thinking through how to navigate institutional processes to get the care / support he needs. Everyone deserves to be in a union, and I hope Harvard reverses its carve-out immediately.” — Anonymous Student Worker