next »

[sheprof]

My SO and I are both hardworking academics in related fields and have been trying for several years to find employment in the same school or location. I am currently employed in a tt position that doesn't have anything for SO. We've both been sending applications and for some reason this year, I've gotten all the interviews, and SO nothing. In the last few years I've met people who essentially got their jobs through their spouses and while they're very grateful, they've also mentioned having colleagues who periodically express resentment toward them or remind them of how they got there. For instance, one said that as long as he stays quiet then everyone loves him, but once he raised his voice about his salary and he was reminded by his chair that his department never wanted him in the first place. Ouch.

Just wondered if other folks had similar worries about their (or their SO) being subjected to such treatment, or if anyone has had these experiences. Is it worth it? Were you able to shake it off by establishing yourself in your own right. Right now, we'd give almost anything to be in the same place, but I also realize that getting a job through a spouse (or any way besides an open national search) sets one up for a lot of grief and judgment down the road. I know there have been a few Chronicle articles that addressed this, and that we would just have to suck it up if we're ever fortunate enough to solve our two body problem.

[madhatter]

The grass is always greener...

I can sum it up succinctly: Getting a job for your spouse > You having a job, your spouse not having one.

[mouseman]

The grass is always greener...

I can sum it up succinctly: Getting a job for your spouse > You having a job, your spouse not having one.

This. 
Also - there are alway's a$$hole colleagues.  If it's not the fact that you're a spousal hire, than it's because you're a woman/minority.  Ultimately, once you're faculty, you're faculty.  If somebody tries to shut you down by saying that you're a spousal hire, you can always respond with:  "well, I brought a new TT line to the department, what did you bring?", or with the perennial favorite, "what's that got to do with the topic at hand?"

Amnirov on this thread to tell us he hates spousal hires in 3, 2, ...

[janewales]

We have a standard way of approaching spousal hires. Whenever we get a spousal request (and we get them a lot), the first step is to review the CV. At this point we're looking to see if this is someone we would be likely to shortlist in a full search. If the answer is no, then we decline the request (and we do this a lot, too). If we like the CV, we take the candidate through the usual process of interviews, job talk, etc, and then we vote, as we would in a standard hire.

We haven't had a spousal hire recently, because money at the university has dried up, but there are two people in the department who were hired through this procedure. We're not, as a group, in agreement about whether there should be spousals at all, even with the procedure described above, but I can truly say that the colleagues in question are thoroughly integrated into the department, and have proven to be real assets.

It doesn't always have to lead to a bad situation, in other words.

[westcoastgirl]

We have a standard way of approaching spousal hires. Whenever we get a spousal request (and we get them a lot), the first step is to review the CV. At this point we're looking to see if this is someone we would be likely to shortlist in a full search. If the answer is no, then we decline the request (and we do this a lot, too). If we like the CV, we take the candidate through the usual process of interviews, job talk, etc, and then we vote, as we would in a standard hire.

We haven't had a spousal hire recently, because money at the university has dried up, but there are two people in the department who were hired through this procedure. We're not, as a group, in agreement about whether there should be spousals at all, even with the procedure described above, but I can truly say that the colleagues in question are thoroughly integrated into the department, and have proven to be real assets.

It doesn't always have to lead to a bad situation, in other words.

A spousal hire was recently thrust upon my department at the university where I'm a grad student. The department called an emergency meeting to protest it. Can a spousal hire be imposed from high above?

[mouseman]

We have a standard way of approaching spousal hires. Whenever we get a spousal request (and we get them a lot), the first step is to review the CV. At this point we're looking to see if this is someone we would be likely to shortlist in a full search. If the answer is no, then we decline the request (and we do this a lot, too). If we like the CV, we take the candidate through the usual process of interviews, job talk, etc, and then we vote, as we would in a standard hire.

We haven't had a spousal hire recently, because money at the university has dried up, but there are two people in the department who were hired through this procedure. We're not, as a group, in agreement about whether there should be spousals at all, even with the procedure described above, but I can truly say that the colleagues in question are thoroughly integrated into the department, and have proven to be real assets.

It doesn't always have to lead to a bad situation, in other words.

A spousal hire was recently thrust upon my department at the university where I'm a grad student. The department called an emergency meeting to protest it. Can a spousal hire be imposed from high above?

This usually happens when it is the spouse of an administrator.  Why was the department protesting it, though?  Were they were forced to bear the entire cost of the line?  If that's the case, they're right.  Otherwise, they could be getting a new line for half or a third of the price.  It sometimes amuses me that people who consistently complain about lack of hires, high teaching load, etc. will refuse a hire for 1/3 the price of a regular line, because, essentially "it wasn't my idea".  Gift horse in the mouth and all that.

However, while I am a big proponent of spousal hires, the point of a spousal hire is that it is the price of retention of an individual.  Therefore, the entity which wants to retain the individual should bear much, if not most, of the cost. 

Now, if indeed we are talking about the spouse of an administrator, well, the fact is that most administrators stay in their job fewer years than it takes for a person to get tenure, so if the hire turns out to be a doozie, well they will be denied tenure.  On the other hand, most of the spousal hires that I've known have been very successful, publishing well, bringing in grant money, etc...