next »

[alibali]

Hi all,

Quick question--is there such a thing as equal opportunities in the UK academia?  I know a few lecturers who got their jobs because they knew someone who knew someone, etc.; does anyone get jobs (lecturer and research assistant/associate) by simply applying for them?  Am I in la la land here by hoping to find a job this way?  If not, why are there only 7 days between the deadline for a job and the set interview date?  Can they possibly make decisions that fast?  Thanks a lot for all your insights!

[scotia]

In the UK all substantive posts (which would include lecturers etc.) must be advertised, and we are required to appoint the most suitable applicant. So unless the people you know were appointed long ago or are at institutions that are not acting within the rules then they will have had to go through the standard recruitment procedures. Of course how 'the most suitable applicant' is defined is subjective, rather like 'fit' is in the US context. I am now in my third academic post in the UK and in all three cases I knew someone at the institution, but that is probably because my first job was a postdoc with someone who already knew me from a Masters program and by the time I applied for my second job I knew people in most of the universities that I was interested in applying to, having worked with them, been involved in research projects, met them at conferences, given research seminars in the department......... The UK is a small place.

There are at least two possible reasons for having a short lead time between deadline and interview date:
1. They have a very good person who they know is interested in the job but the rules state that they need to advertise (and I have sat on a panel that was set up under just such conditions and the panel split between the 'insider' and another excellent candidate who emerged - in the end I think a big mistake was made and the insider was appointed, but it was a very close call. If the other candidate had not stated that they could not start for 8 months I think he would have got the job);
2. Remember that the UK system is not the same as the US system, there is much greater mobility in the job market during a career and we do not have a 'job season': jobs are advertised when we need to replace people.The department may need someone to start asap (for example, for the start of next semester). If people involved in the search know in advance that there is a tight deadline we can, and do, make a decision that quickly - the necessary appointments have already been set up in people's diaries and the panel is screening applications as soon as they come in so that a lot of the work has been done before the deadline (which does not mean those applying close to the deadline are disadvantaged - because we screen initially on whether candidates match the essential criteria, in my field at least we can screen out a lot of applicants relatively quickly).

Having said all this, if you require a visa to work in the UK it is now getting harder because of changes in the immigration rules (something that the universities are not very happy about). Also, because of budget constraints, I know that my institution is no longer flying in people for interviews - overseas applicants are initially being interviewed via a video link.

[alibali]

Thanks so much scotia for such a detailed and informative reply.  So not all candidates have equal chances after all, right?  Or do they?  Hard to say.  I like your word choice 'we are required to appoint the most suitable candidate', but that doesn't mean that it always happens.  Maybe it's the first job that's harder to get.  Neither my husband nor I would need a visa, but a work permit (our country relatively recently joined the EU but we live in the US), which I guess can still be perceived as problematic by the HR individuals who I hear are not particularly knowledgeable about immigration rules. 

[scotia]

So not all candidates have equal chances after all, right?  Or do they?  Hard to say. 

There is nowhere in the world I am aware where human beings do not have inherent biases: we are fallible and imperfect. This is a simple reality, and I don't believe that things are any worse in the UK than in other countries. Of course if people are sufficiently determined (and themselves biased) they will find 'evidence' to support their theory of conspiracy simply because the white guy was appointed rather than the woman, or a woman was appointed rather than the ethnic minority guy, or the ethnic minority candidate must have been favored unfairly........ In my many years of serving on a committee I have been aware of individuals with particular outlooks, but not of an inherently biased committee. I have colleagues of many nationalities who have graduated from many different institutions. All you can do is, if selected, go to an interview and be the very best candidate you can be.

Don't start out with the assumption that the system is against you - I have interviewed people who seem determined to prove they are being discriminated against even when this is not the case. I suppose we are grateful that they prove themselves to be a problem at interview, thereby saving us from future difficulties had we appointed them. Search committees become alarmed by paranoia.