next »

[Anonymous]

I am writing about the process of, in order to recruit or retain a candidate, hiring their spouse for a tenure-track position.  

I was unaware of how widespread this epidemic has become. Only recently, I have seen several candidates in my field and others hired solely because they are the partner of a highly desired candidate in the same or different department. I have little more to say, except that I am sickened at the whole process. This is extortion on the part of the desired candidate, and prostitution on the part of the trailing spouse. There seems to be little hope of curbing this sitution, since one university can not realistically take a stand against the practice if every other institution on the market does it. There is, however, something we faculty members can do:

Do not tenure these people. Shun them. Voice your opinion about the means by which they acquired their position.  

Anyone with the research skills to gain a Ph.D. should have also known that academic positions exist in a national market. If you are lucky enough to get a university to go along with your demands for spousal accommodation, good for you, just don't expect me to ever take you seriously as a scholar. The road to the academy is through teaching and research, which is what should be rewarded, not having an in-demand bedfellow.

[New Assistant Professor]

DO NOT SHARE MY EMAIL ADDRESS

[Dorortea Liberina]

I don't see what the problem is if the spouse is indeed qualified. In many universities, these monies come from the university as an extra line in a department -- so, an existing line (if there is one) is not "used" for this kind of spousal hire, typically. The department will interview the candidate, and then decide whether they are interested in the hire or not -- we've had some very good hires in my university in this manner. The department who lands the spouse essentially wins an extra line, and assuming that it's someone who was highly desired, everyone wins.

[Professor Spice]

Is this forum really the place for such vitriol? Perhaps you should write to the letters page of The Chronicle, and of Academe, if you are a member of the American Association of University Professors.  While, as an unmarried academic trying to make my way in a difficult job market, I don't appreciate the spousal-hiring phenomenon any more than you do, I am also aware of the political vagaries of this, as of any other, market. People are hired for all sorts of reasons that have little or nothing, unfortunately, to do with their teaching or research qualifications. To pretend that the academy is an unsullied meritocracy is to set yourself up for perpetual disappointment, I'm afraid.

[Assistant professor]

I graduated from a university where there were quite a few "spousal hires" of which to speak. Some taught in the same department. Some taught in related departments. Some taught in totally unrelated fields. In each case, the "spouse" who was a "secondary hire" was just as qualified, if not more qualified, for the position he/she occupied. Most were nationally known/ranked scholars with book prizes, grants, and wonderful publication records. In my estimation, and I hope I am correct, this is more the norm than the situation you describe in your post.

[Tippi]

I agree with Dorortea. With such unjustified and scattershot ire against thousands of perfectly sound or superior academics you have never met, you make yourself sound like a nut with an axe to grind about a particular person you're thinking of, someone you don't like or respect.  I'm sure whomever has gotten your dander up is undeserving, but all the spousal hires I'm familiar with are excellent people who held tenure- track positions in excellent departments, who have the option of staying put if they don't get hired along with their spouse (and some of them do stay put, since their departments are better or higher rated than ours). Most of the spousal hires I know of are people who come in as associate professors or higher, anyway, coming in with tenure already. That's why they get a spousal hire, since both spouses are distinguished already. It is pretty rare for any new Ph.D. to get such an offer unless they've won a prize or have a $10-million grant!

[Another anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
 
"I was unaware of how widespread this epidemic has become."

!?

Anonymous also wrote: "Only recently, I have seen several candidates in my field and others hired solely because ..."

Solely ... yeah, right.

S/he wrote: "There is, however, something we faculty members can do: Do not tenure these people. Shun them. Voice your opinion about the means by which they acquired their position."

Yes, do this, especially if they've published more and better work, and are better teachers, than some of the stodgy, old tenured faculty members -- or, for that matter, some of the mediocre new faculty members, hired with modest talent but trendy topics and famous advisers (like this never happens).

I mean, how else is the old guard going to hold the line?

Anonymous wrote: "Anyone with the research skills to gain a Ph.D. should have also known that academic positions exist in a national
market."

Why? Because that's the status quo?

You want us to believe that you are a university professor, yet you post this drivel? If you want to be taken seriously, post some argument and analysis (and maybe also some hard numbers), not mere assertion and vitriol.

Sheesh.

M.