The rising demand for robust mental health services on college campuses has become a defining challenge for modern higher education, yet the very individuals tasked with providing this critical support often face a precarious and uncertain professional landscape. At the College of San Mateo, this tension has erupted into a public debate, exposing a significant gap in how essential advisory roles are valued and compensated. The central conflict revolves around personal counselors who advise student mental health organizations, whose payment is not guaranteed by contract but is left to the discretion of campus deans. This practice creates financial instability and raises a fundamental question: when does a passion-driven commitment to student well-being cross the line into uncompensated labor? The situation has ignited a call for systemic change, pushing for formal recognition and fair pay for work that students and advocates describe as nothing short of life-saving.
A Call for Contractual Guarantees
At a recent district board meeting, College of San Mateo Active Minds advisor Gil Perez articulated a clear and urgent demand for guaranteed, fair compensation to be formally integrated into the district’s policies. The core vulnerability, as Perez highlighted, lies in the absence of any contractual language solidifying payment for personal counselors who advise student mental health groups. This omission effectively makes their compensation dependent on the fluctuating priorities and decisions of campus deans. Such a system is inherently unstable; a counselor’s pay could be withdrawn if a new dean decides the advisory work is strictly voluntary, a situation Perez has personally navigated. To eliminate this uncertainty, he is pushing for this specific compensation to be included in the new contract currently under negotiation between the district and the AFT1493 teachers’ union. This proactive measure is aimed at protecting not only current staff but all future counselors who undertake these vital roles. Reinforcing this point, numerous students provided powerful testimonials, emphasizing that Active Minds functions less like a conventional club and more as an essential mental health resource, offering critical support to their peers.
A Wider Trend of Uncompensated Labor
Skyline College Professor Luis Zúñiga contextualized the compensation issue as a symptom of a much larger, systemic problem within the district. He argued that the expectation for faculty to perform crucial but uncompensated extra labor has become an unsettling norm, with the district seemingly exploiting the staff’s profound dedication to student success. This perspective reframes the debate from an isolated administrative oversight to a pattern of institutional behavior that devalues the extensive work faculty perform outside of their formal teaching duties. Zúñiga expressed deep frustration over the district’s repeated failure to address these concerns, despite them being raised on multiple occasions. This long-simmering discontent has now reached a critical point, directly impacting the ongoing contract negotiations between the district and the AFT1493 teachers’ union. The talks have reached an impasse, prompting the union to plan a strike authorization vote if a satisfactory agreement cannot be reached. This potential escalation underscores the gravity of the situation, signaling that faculty patience has worn thin and that a more forceful approach may be imminent to secure the recognition and compensation they believe they deserve.
The Path Forward Amidst an Impasse
The debate over advisor compensation ultimately cast a harsh light on the district’s reliance on faculty goodwill to sustain essential student services. The impassioned pleas from both counselors and students at the board meeting highlighted a significant disconnect between the perceived value of campus mental health support and the lack of formal, contractual mechanisms to ensure its stability. The stalled negotiations with the AFT1493 union, which had reached a critical impasse, became a focal point for these broader frustrations. The union’s decision to move toward a strike authorization vote represented a pivotal moment, signaling that the era of accepting uncompensated responsibilities as part of the job had ended. The outcome of this conflict was poised to set a lasting precedent, determining whether such vital roles would finally be recognized as integral, compensated labor or continue to exist in a precarious, voluntary capacity.
