next »

[navelgazer]

After my husband's two post-doc advisers carefully coordinated their letters to make sure that my husband's move between their schools (necessitated by my TT job) was couched in scientific terms only...

his grad adviser went into great detail about me and our child in his letter. Does anyone know of a situation where something like this has happened and it hasn't significantly affect someone's chance at getting interviewed? (As opposed to their chances of getting an offer or a spousal.)

We know this because:
1. friend from grad lab is TT at our school, got very angry and told us
2. TT colleague from my husband's building told a mutual friend to make sure husband found out
3. friend from grad lab at another R1 with a search emailed us

They all think, in different ways, that this will make sure most committees don't even look at his file. [Compounded, probably, by his post-doc's sudden death and lack of supporting calls.] The worst part is my husband's work on and belief in his research proposals. The only silver lining: hey! Maybe his science rocks but no one looked at it. (It wasn't good enough for the open position at my school, but that wasn't surprising.)

He did get one interview in a top-30 program at an R1 where the chair of the committee is a woman. (Less than 10% of the full professors in his field are women.)

[hegemony]

I don't quite understand the situation.  Why would the fact that an applicant has a wife and child mean he wouldn't get an interview?  Is the problem that he would be understood to be moving only because he wants to be closer to his wife and child?  (In that case, no problem -- if he's good, they'll want him no matter why he wants to come.)  Or is it the case that he'll only come if he's offered a spousal hire?  Can you clarify?

[navelgazer]

I don't quite understand the situation.  Why would the fact that an applicant has a wife and child mean he wouldn't get an interview? 

Who knows? This is what several people have told us was a factor while they were on a search committee where his file, and many others were looked at.

Is the problem that he would be understood to be moving only because he wants to be closer to his wife and child? 

No we're all together for now and forever.

Or is it the case that he'll only come if he's offered a spousal hire?  Can you clarify?

This hasn't been totally decided by us, but it looks like we might not get a choice in the matter anyway. Disappointing to my spouse, maybe a relief to me.

[hegemony]

I can't think of any reason they would care whether an applicant had a spouse and family other than the applicant requiring a spousal hire.  It is unusual to mention the applicant's family situation in the letter of reference, but that's mostly because the letter is supposed to talk about their academic qualifications, not what they do in the rest of their time.  However odd it may be to have these mentioned, they'll conclude that the letter-writer is peculiar, not your hubby. 

I can't see any search committee eliminating someone because they have a family.  They'll figure that most applicants have partners, which is the truth.  There's always the dread that someone will insist on a spousal hire, but no search committee is going to seek out and eliminate candidates with partners just on account of the dread of the spousal hire.  I would rest easy.

[nanoputian]

Do you have any details about what the grad adviser said in his letter?

"Mr. Navel is unable to be an active member of my research group because he's always with his wife and kid. He thinks that everyone else should cover for him because he has more responsibility."

is very different than:

"Mr. Navel displays an exceptional level of dedication to his work in my lab. He has been able to balance the rigor of postdoc research with the demands of a family with a high degree of maturity and professionalism."

It sounds as if you have assumed the letter brings you and your child up in a negative light?

[totoro]

I'm confused about what the situation is here.

[daniel_von_flanagan]

If a candidate has strong academic credentials, as supported by his publication record and letters, I don't care whether he's married or single, raises fighting cocks, or worships a bowl of pasta.  However, if his advisor's letter witters on about the candidate's family instead of his scientific prowess, then I wonder if he ran out of good things to say where it counts. - DvF

[janewales]

Totoro, I think the concern is that a two-body problem has been made clear at the application stage, rather than later on (hence the reference in the subject line to a committee knowing ahead of time). Forum wisdom has generally been that one should hold back mention of/ negotiation for a spousal hire until one is in a bargaining position. The OP is asking whether institutions will choose to eliminate an obvious two-body application.

If your husband's cover letter had said that he would only consider accepting a position if a second tenure-track line were also found for his wife, we would have to pass, because it's a condition we can't meet. We would not reject the file, though, in the case you describe. It wouldn't be ethical, and furthermore, we wouldn't assume that the letter-writer understood everything about the situation. An academic spouse is not necessarily always looking for a second tenure-track line.

[totoro]

But from reading the posts it seems they are both already at the same institution? But the husband was in temporary position and looking for a tenure track? I am really unclear about what is going on.