Barnard is a very special college. Its character comes not only from being a women's college and a small liberal arts college within a large research university, but also quite centrally from the character of its contingent faculty—namely those instructors not on the tenure track who comprise a majority of Barnard's faculty. This month, those contingent faculty members will vote on whether to form a union. Here's why they should vote "yes."

Over the past decade, tenure-track faculty at Barnard have seen their teaching loads reduced, despite steady increases in student enrollment. It is the contingent faculty who are meeting the bulk of the educational needs of students, doing the same work in classrooms, laboratories, and studios as their tenure-track counterparts, but for much lower pay, worse or no benefits, and without a pathway to a stable career at the college, regardless of the excellence of their research or teaching.

Barnard has been lucky that it has been able to draw on the richness of the greater metropolitan New York area to staff courses in departments that combine professional training with teaching: Professional writers teach writing, professional dancers teach dance, professional psychologists teach psychology, professional architects teach architecture, and professional urban planners teach urban studies. The majority of the contingent faculty is found in those departments, although Barnard relies on contingent faculty in all departments.

However, despite the benefits these professionals bring to the table as contingent faculty members, the vast majority receives no medical or retirement benefits, has no job security, and receives no support for research, travel, or professional development to support their teaching. There have also been no common rules or formal procedures regarding pay, benefits, raises, seniority, or other terms of employment for the contingent faculty. This has allowed many types of inequities to arise within and across departments.

Tenure is traditionally the benchmark investment a college makes for the sake of a committed, engaged, and intellectually and artistically daring faculty. Yet, as the American Association of University Professors notes, "no matter how qualified and dedicated, contingent faculty members are hobbled in the performance of their duties by a lack of professional treatment and support." If Barnard is unwilling to increase the size of its tenured faculty, then it cannot achieve its teaching mission—"to provide the highest quality liberal arts education to promising and high-achieving young women"—without investing much more than it has previously been willing to in its contingent faculty.

To make the situation concrete, in the 2014-15 academic year, there were about 278 contingent faculty members out of a total faculty of about 418. That is to say, 67 percent of Barnard's faculty were not protected by tenure, creating a paradoxical situation for a liberal arts college dedicated to fostering the highest level of teaching.

I have served as a lecturer in the department of English since 2000. I've loved every course I've taught and appreciated the quality of the students I've had. This is what keeps me at Barnard. I've also been published, participated in conferences, advised senior theses, written recommendations, and become a mentor for many of the students I have taught throughout their years at Barnard. I've been an engaged member of the Barnard community. And yet, while tuition for students has risen 41.5 percent since I began teaching, my pay—already a tiny fraction of what a tenure-track faculty member makes—has decreased. And despite the depth of my commitment to the college, there is no guarantee that I will be asked to return, which makes teaching a perilous career choice.

What makes these disparities in pay, benefits, and status even more troubling is that the contingent faculty is about 70 percent female, a much higher percentage of women than the tenure-track faculty. Thus, the interests of the contingent faculty are also very much women's issues and align with the interests of Barnard as a women's college.

Motivated by these unaddressed problems surrounding the use of contingent faculty and encouraged by the efforts of Columbia's graduate student union drive, more than two-thirds of the contingent faculty came together last spring under the banner of Barnard Contingent Faculty-UAW Local 2110 (BCF-UAW) to petition the National Labor Relations Board for the right to form a union. An agreement with Barnard cleared the way for a vote that will take place in September via mail ballot. For this election, the Barnard administration has pledged to remain neutral.

I urge Barnard's contingent faculty to vote for the union. Doing so is the only way to protect ourselves against job insecurity and to ensure that the education we provide is as academically rigorous and daring as possible. The contingent faculty is an integral part of the teaching mission of the college and deserve a place at the table when decisions about our working conditions are being made. Barnard could not be what it is without us.

The author is an adjunct lecturer in the department of English at Barnard College.

To respond to this op-ed, or to submit an op-ed, contact opinion@columbiaspectator.com.