next »

[buddy]

How unusual is this: A VPAA/Dean offer, at a SLAC, that comes with neither tenure (which is not really an issue) OR any kind of contract (term) commitment at all from the institution's end, but simply an appt letter that states that the position, like any and all non-faculty positions on campus, constitutes "at will" employment? 

Buddy

[notaprof]

How unusual is this: A VPAA/Dean offer, at a SLAC, that comes with neither tenure (which is not really an issue) OR any kind of contract (term) commitment at all from the institution's end, but simply an appt letter that states that the position, like any and all non-faculty positions on campus, constitutes "at will" employment? 

Buddy

Not at all unusual in my little area of the SLAC world.  The "at will" employment and lack of tenure means you should be careful not to cause many ripples.  You have to please the administration and all the faculty, tenured and non.  Not an easy task since they are often at odds.  The last two people in this situation locally were here less than two years each but I understand that they were encouraged to leave quietly for a tidy sum. 

[buddy]

Thanks for your reply.  The institution in question, though clearly populated by wonderful folks, has a heap of problems, so ripples of some kind undoubtedly will be--and have already been--part of the effort to solve some of those problems.  I have heard nothing to suggest that a tidy sum--or a sum of any kind--would be part of a potential exit piece, should things go south.  It sounds like significant risk with no security or safety net or parachute.  But again, how common is both no tenure (again, not a big issue here, frankly) AND no contract (not even a full, one-year contract) at all for such a position?  I have been offered similar positions before, and they have always come with one or the other (or more). 

[aandsdean]

The one I'm taking doesn't have tenure, nor is the duration spelled out, though there's a yearly salary, which I suppose presumes that the offer is for a year.

It does have a severance clause, however, which is nice.  There are a lot of nice things about the job, but this one was a pleasant surprise.

[buddy]

You say there is a "severance clause"--does that mean there's an actual contract?  In my case it is simply an appt letter, with salary mentioned, but also an emphasis on "at will."  The institution balked at a "one-year contract." 

[aandsdean]

You say there is a "severance clause"--does that mean there's an actual contract?  In my case it is simply an appt letter, with salary mentioned, but also an emphasis on "at will."  The institution balked at a "one-year contract." 

Mine (it's just a letter from the new school's president) says I get a severance package and defines its terms.  The "at will" thing in yours is a little worrisome; certainly, a clause that says something like "All administrative appointees serve at the will of the president" would be OK, because it's always true, but if it's something more than that I'd be maybe somewhat concerned.

Google, google, google.  Or, just don't take the job and tell them why.  (Interthreaduality alert.)

[buddy]

Yeah, I believe this goes beyond the "serves at the pleasure of" phrase that we all know so well (and accept), and that, indeed, is why I find it, as you say, worrisome. 

[zharkov]

Naturally, if their proposal bothers you, you should negotiate something better.

I suggest the principled negotiation process as described in Getting to Yes.

To offer a simple example, if both you and your counterpart agree that stability in the position is desirable, you then come up with a few options to enable that stability.  One could be a one year or even a rolling contract.

[buddy]

I may try that approach, but for all sorts of reasons, again too long and complicated to get into here, I don't see the institution in question biting on such a proposal...which, of course, adds to the whole worrisome and instability piece.  It may be better simply to walk away...but it's hard to walk away from an offer...even a flawed--and perhaps hopelessly flawed--one.   

[aandsdean]

I may try that approach, but for all sorts of reasons, again too long and complicated to get into here, I don't see the institution in question biting on such a proposal...which, of course, adds to the whole worrisome and instability piece.  It may be better simply to walk away...but it's hard to walk away from an offer...even a flawed--and perhaps hopelessly flawed--one.   

Listen to your bad feelings on this one, would be what I would say. 

I withdrew from a search this year (granted, I hadn't been offered the position) because, after putting the situation at this school in the context of the other interviews I have had in the recent past, I knew the risk was just too big.  It really was like lifting a giant weight off my shoulders, no lie, and I haven't looked back.

Look, to be VPAA/Provost, you're already going to be out on a limb quite regularly.  I wouldn't knowingly go out on one that was already 1/3 sawed through.

[notaprof]

I may try that approach, but for all sorts of reasons, again too long and complicated to get into here, I don't see the institution in question biting on such a proposal...which, of course, adds to the whole worrisome and instability piece.  It may be better simply to walk away...but it's hard to walk away from an offer...even a flawed--and perhaps hopelessly flawed--one.   

You don't have to turn it down as long as you go into with eyes wide open and having reasonable expectations.  If you don't have other offers, I wouldn't walk away just yet.  

If you are allowed to express your opinion in private to whomever you report to, and you are listened to, then it might not be so bad. The ultimate decision may not be the one you prefer but as long as your concerns were considered and you understand the reasons for a decision then you can deal with it.  However, if you are merely the person who has to enforce the unpopular rules and have to take all the flack when you are not even asked your professional opinion about the ramifications of a decision then it is hard to maintain any sense of personal integrity.  That is a toxic place, so keep your resume updated.  And with such an appointment, you owe them nothing and can walk away as soon as something else comes along.

For what it is worth, when a new president came, we all had to sign a document stating that we understand that the college could end our position, or our relationship with the college at any time.  Now a similar phrase is attached to our job descriptions which we have to update each year and sign that we understand and agree.  I admit this bothers me a little bit every year and it does make me paranoid sometimes.  What I really resent the lack of respect and appreciation for long term and dedicated employees that such a thing implies.  It certainly took away the warm and fuzzy feelings we all used to have at this place, but we are all still here.  

Good luck, whatever you decide.

On preview, I also agree with the comments that aandsdean says so I am pretty wishy washy on this and not much help.  If you have other options, leave this one on the table. 

[buddy]

The prez, a non-academic (business background), of this institution is new, and the place is in a real $ crisis (though that has improved a bit, thanks to the new prez), which has called for some difficult and unpopular decisions.  I have been assured that I would have input, at least, into the kinds of decisions that notaprof mentions, but it has also been made clearly, and directly so, to me that part of my job would be precisely to take the flack on some of these issues in order to deflect it from the prez, who has been getting pounded pretty hard to date.  It's a bit of a mess.  But the faculty and staff are wonderful, the place's history is very impressive, its academic rep is intact (though it's currently bleeding students, but it hopes to rebound and grow bigger than before), and, assuming they can get through this current mess, they will come out on the other side in great shape.  It's just not, right now, the ideal context for the position in question and the person who fills it, particularly given that the offer comes with no security whatsoever.   

[zharkov]

The prez, a non-academic (business background), of this institution is new, and the place is in a real $ crisis (though that has improved a bit, thanks to the new prez), which has called for some difficult and unpopular decisions.  I have been assured that I would have input, at least, into the kinds of decisions that notaprof mentions, but it has also been made clearly, and directly so, to me that part of my job would be precisely to take the flack on some of these issues in order to deflect it from the prez, who has been getting pounded pretty hard to date.  It's a bit of a mess.  But the faculty and staff are wonderful, the place's history is very impressive, its academic rep is intact (though it's currently bleeding students, but it hopes to rebound and grow bigger than before), and, assuming they can get through this current mess, they will come out on the other side in great shape.  It's just not, right now, the ideal context for the position in question and the person who fills it, particularly given that the offer comes with no security whatsoever.   

This seems like the worst of possible worlds:  You take the flak, but they don't give you a parachute.  If you do the president's bidding, which you should, you can be forced out by the faculty or board of trustees.  And do you think that the guy who refused you a contract will come to your rescue?

FWIW, I think you can tell them you want a contract and severance package, or just pass on the job.
 

[pokerphd]

As as an 'at-will' admin veteran, I've come to use the phrase, "I have a one-day rolling contract." Sounds like the same would apply in your case. Check out the specs on your probationary period (~ 100 days - 6 mos) and be a little quiet--study the terrain--during that time; then, let'er rip. If you're good with diplomacy, planning/action, and interpersonal skills, you'll be fine.

[sibyl]

At-will employment is not at all unusual for administrative positions.  Some VPAAs get tenure, others do not; it is not in and of itself a red flag.  But you would be wise to try to get a parachute of some kind, such as a rolling contract (e.g. your first "year" runs from July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2010; in 2009 you will be considered a one-year contract, etc., so that in effect you always have another year to find an exit option) or a buyout clause (if they fire you before June 30, 2015, they have to give you a year's salary).

That presumes, of course, that you haven't already decided this is not a good situation.  If there are other red flags -- you didn't get along with the president, the faculty seem uninterested, uninspired, and/or hostile, etc. -- then you should trust those and not take it.  If the other things were good, though, don't let the at-will and untenured nature of the position be the only thing to derail a good opportunity.

Good luck.