next »

[Anon 2]

So I've reviewed a lot of the posts from the last year or so about illegal questions.  And based on the responses it seems as if the candidate volunteering the information seems to not considered a faux pas by many posters.

However, I'm wondering how it's handled when you do volunteer information that would be illegal to ask, and one or two of the committee members cut you off.  For example, several years ago I was interviewing at a CC for an administrative position.   One of the committee members asked me about one particular area of research that I had just presented at a conference, and why I was drawn to that particular area of research.   I mentioned that first-hand observation had drawn me into exploring the area further.   They asked for more details, and at which time I started to explain about an incident at the religious organization I was attending (it wasn't anything that could be considered negative about the organization, and I didn't even clarify what type of religious organization), as it was the major influence in why I choose to explore that area more indepth.   I was prompty cut off by one member of the committee, as being told that my response was against EOE guidelines.  

I didn't think I did anything wrong, and at the time I felt the committee member in question was rude.  I was wondering now if perhaps I had made the error?   I probably wouldn't answer the same question in the same way now, as I have several more years, of life, work, and hiring committee experience.  But, I do wonder if volunteering information like this is ever appropriate in the interview setting?

And what are the best ways to respond when the applicant reveals information that is illegal for the hiring committee to ask, and the hiring committee reacts in a negative fashion?

[Green Eyed Lady]

I was just told by someone who wanted to interview me and who was explaining the process to me that it is NOT illegal for items that the committee is not allowed to bring up themselves to be brought up by the applicant. For example, they are not allowed to ask if you have kids, but it is very frequent that interviewees will ask about local schools, which makes it obvious that they have kids. Sounds like some committee members don't know the rules and are jumping the gun by restricting the interviewee needlessly. Or maybe it depends on the type of institution?

[five]

That does sound unusual.  Is it possible that the interviewer was afraid that s/he had inadvertantly urged you to go into a topic area that was off-limits for them to ask about?  Maybe s/he was trying to either give you an out or save themselves from being accused of bringing up something illegal?

[Anon 2]

Five...I think that's probably what happened.   Usually, I'm dodging illegal questions when I go on a campus interview from well meaning secretaries and other support staff who are trying to make conversation.   But, this was the only time that I had run into a committee member getting upset because of something I had said.

I think this goes to show that committee members are not educated about the illegal questions and what happens if the applicant brings up this information, or when it's appopriate to ask these types of questions (after a job offer has been made and the applicant has accepted formerly).

[schizo]

If you reread some of the earlier threads on this topic, then you will see that I am not a big fan of this "illegal question" business anyway. I make it a policy of offering up as much information as I can in interviews, because I want the school to know exactly what they are getting in me. I mention my spouse, the fact that I do not yet have children, but will want them soon, and I ask about loal churches and the predominant demonination in town (if there is one). I've never, ever had anyone cut me off when telling this information, and I actually find that they are relieved once I do "spill the beans" about things they are not allowed to ask. If they don't want to hire me because I'm married, then fine, I don't want to work with people like that anyway. If they think having children will make me less of a teacher, then I don't want to be working with them, because we obviously don't share the same kind of priorities. It's just how I feel about it. Some people are adamant about not divulging information, and that's fine, but I'd guess those are the same people who post about problems in their departments and not "fitting" very well into the departmental culture.

[Ruth]

To schizo--but do you get hired, after you spill all the news about yourself?

[%sig%]

[to schizo and Ruth]

Ruth wrote:

> To schizo--but do you get hired, after you spill all the news
> about yourself?
>



and more importantly: are you male or female?

[Moz]

I was asked illegal questions regarding marital and child status on every interview (and I mean DIRECTLY asked!).  From the chair of the search committee at an RI private ivy: "Are you married?  What does your wife do?  Is she an academic?"  From a search committee member at a private RI:  "Any kids?  No?  Planning on any?"  From the associate dean at a lower tier public undergrad institution: " Are you married?"

In most cases, I think they were asking to be helpful.  At Ivy, when I told them yes, I was married to an almost-finished PhD, they made the info available to the dean who began circulating her CV to the University and community to help find her a job.  At private RI, they wanted to tell me about the schools.  The dean at public tier 3 was just a twit.  I  didn't care about the interview because I decided within 3 minutes of arriving that I would never work there.

Moz

[%sig%]

[Search Committee Member]

Glad to hear the reaction from Moz. I'm careful not to "ask" illegal questions (we're given a search prep session by a lawyer/vice provost every year), but I often say something on the order of "I'm not going to ask any illegal questions, but if you'd like information about the local schools [or or the maternity leave policy, or whatever else I think might be of interest], we could have a chat later." I know that some people on this list would take this as illegal fishing, suspect dark motives, and be offended. On the other hand, when I was on the market a long time ago, I was very anxious to know about various social and family related issues, and was extremely grateful for the people who gave me a chance to ask in some slightly less formal context (lunch, drive to the hotel, etc.).  In the current department, after retirements during the late 1980s, I can not imagine a committee that would take any personal situation into account in a negative way.

[five]

I'm not schizo, but I second his/her sentiments about the need to be completely forthright about my personal circumstances (married + kids).  I do not want any surprises in my new position about how families are viewed by my colleagues.  Not to mention that it is extremely important to me that I am in a place with people who share my values.  I have never encountered any hostility upon my sharing of this personal information, and, although I cannot ever know if it ever cost me an offer, my instincts say it has not.  I have even divulged this info at the phone interview stage, and was still invited out for campus interviews.

To Ruth:  I have been offered multiple positions using this approach.  

To "to schizo & Ruth":  I am female.

[is it okay to lie?]

I have been asked about my family situation, if I owned a house  etc. in an interview for a non-tt position. The questions were very direct and I knew there was a "right" and a "wrong" answer - I knew what they wanted to hear and that this question could be a deal breaker. I happened to have the "desirable" family situation and told them so. But let's say it was different and I had the feeling that I would destroy my chances by answering truthfully and possibly also by refusing to answer. Would you think it's okay to lie - legally and morally?

[Clueless]

What amazes me is that the posters in this thread seem to think that being a church-going, married person with children might go against them when that is the mainstream ideal.

I thought the negative light was cast on single people (with or without children) and those who may not be Christian.

I thought it was possible that Anon 2's committee member who cut his/her answer short might have been doing Anon 2 a favor, fearing Anon 2 would reveal the religious affiliation and trigger a bias from another committee member.

[%sig%]

[Ruth]

I think many of the people answering this thread are too complacent or optimistic.

In the sciences, if you're a woman with children, it's often held against you, sometimes overtly ("Will you have enough time in lab?")

In many cases, having a spouse who also needs a job is considered a "problem," not a possibility.

And the places wanting families with children may also be homophobic. Do you want to work in a homophobic place, O ye who think you have lots of choices?

[%sig%]

[schizo]

Yes, I am confident that my being forthcoming has helped me land the jobs I have received. In the most recent case, my divulging information about my wife's field of study has led to an offer for her, if she chooses to take it (not a "trailing spouse", just an added perk-she is in a related field, but not on the T-T search). I know that there are dissenters about this policy, and I suppose I can understand their reluctance, since we all know that search committees are strange beasts, but I still like to have everything out there up front.

Clueless, while it may be the supposistion that "greater America" is in the mainstream you describe, academic communities, in my experience, most certainly do not fall into that "mainstream". I have had committee members openly mock the Christian faith in interviews (which everyone chuckled at), before I was given the chance to explain that I was a practicing Christian, (which I did). While it did honestly offend me, at least I knew where this particular group of people stood. I don't care if they share by beliefs, but I would expect them to accept that I have them and respect that fact. (I'm not an evangelical so most people don't know my beliefs until they ask or I tell them through the course of conversation).

Anyway, I didn't mean to take this down the "religion" tangent, I was just giving a specific example of a situation.

[schizo]

Ruth,

I believe it is quite a jump to go from someone being interested in you having a spouse and kids to saying that they are homophobic. Maybe they perceive the spouse and kids as a sign that you are ready to settle down and stay there if you get the job, instead of looking for the next "step" in the career ladder.