|
old_school
|
 |
« on: November 25, 2011, 09:05:30 AM » |
|
How common (or uncommon) is it for a school to have full-time faculty (non-tenure track) with "at will employment". I.e., there is no contract, one can be let go from one day to the other without reason (likewise faculty can leave that suddenly too).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Simplify.
|
|
|
untenured
On far too many committees
Member-Moderator
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 5,626
|
|
« Reply #1 on: November 25, 2011, 09:12:32 AM » |
|
In my experience, that's common. At will employment is the norm in the United States unless something overrides it. Non-tenure track faculty are typically at-will employees. And guess what, untenured tenure-track employees are often at-will too.
The presence of a contract does not necessarily change this. If you sign a contract that says "your employment is at will, then it is. Union members receive additional protections, but many university faculty are not eligible for union membership.
At-will employment gives employers great discretion. Tons. Much more than most people think.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
You are among the Pure and Truthful, however small their Number.
My goodness, that was an exceptionally good analysis of the forum. |
|
|
|
old_school
|
|
« Reply #2 on: November 25, 2011, 09:18:34 AM » |
|
In my experience, that's common. At will employment is the norm in the United States unless something overrides it. Non-tenure track faculty are typically at-will employees. And guess what, untenured tenure-track employees are often at-will too.
So if you are in a tenure-track position, but don't have tenure yet - you may still have "at will employment" in some cases?? Wow .. I guess I've only seen yearly contracts (or multi-year) for nontenured faculty early on the tenure-track.
At-will employment gives employers great discretion. Tons. Much more than most people think.
No doubt about that. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Simplify.
|
|
|
untenured
On far too many committees
Member-Moderator
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 5,626
|
|
« Reply #3 on: November 25, 2011, 09:22:27 AM » |
|
Yes, it's true. Never forget, at-will is the "default rule" in the United States. No contract? At-will employment. Contract exists but does not state one way or the other? At-will employment. Contract says at-will employment? At-will employment.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
You are among the Pure and Truthful, however small their Number.
My goodness, that was an exceptionally good analysis of the forum. |
|
|
|
mleok
|
|
« Reply #4 on: November 25, 2011, 01:48:43 PM » |
|
What would a contract have to say so that it override the presumption of at-will employment? My impression was that if it stipulates a fixed term of appointment, and that you can only be fired "for cause," then it overrides the presumption of at-will employment. An employment contract which simply stipulates the terms of the appointment, without a fixed period, would imply at-will employment. See, for example, http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/employment-at-will-definition-30022.html |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 25, 2011, 01:50:02 PM by mleok »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
untenured
On far too many committees
Member-Moderator
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 5,626
|
|
« Reply #5 on: November 25, 2011, 10:14:05 PM » |
|
That link you offer provides a good summary. In short, any language or conduct that would lead the employee to believe that he or she can be fired only 'for cause'. No smart employer would grant this protection voluntarily.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
You are among the Pure and Truthful, however small their Number.
My goodness, that was an exceptionally good analysis of the forum. |
|
|
|
totoro
|
|
« Reply #6 on: November 26, 2011, 02:11:45 AM » |
|
I think fixed term contracts are the norm for VAPs post-docs etc. But maybe I'm wrong...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mleok
|
|
« Reply #7 on: November 26, 2011, 12:24:31 PM » |
|
Even if in principle the employment contracts for some tenure-track faculty are "at will," the fallout from firing tenure-track faculty without cause would be disastrous for the reputation of any respectable university.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
untenured
On far too many committees
Member-Moderator
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 5,626
|
|
« Reply #8 on: November 26, 2011, 04:09:10 PM » |
|
+1 to totoro and mleok. Both true.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
You are among the Pure and Truthful, however small their Number.
My goodness, that was an exceptionally good analysis of the forum. |
|
|
|
seniorscholar
|
|
« Reply #9 on: November 26, 2011, 06:41:54 PM » |
|
How common (or uncommon) is it for a school to have full-time faculty (non-tenure track) with "at will employment". I.e., there is no contract, one can be let go from one day to the other without reason (likewise faculty can leave that suddenly too).
My belief is that it would be very uncommon at a bricks and mortar established college, with a regular site for classes, offerings in several subjects, an application and admissions process for students, a history more than five years long and accreditation by some recognized body. What the case may be for online schools, "pop-up" schools that spring into existence one year in 12 suburban locations and are gone by the next, one-specialty schools in which all of the "regular" faculty are cronies, correspondence colleges, and "get your degree in 12 weekends -- come this Friday and begin your course work" schools is another case entirely. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
spinnaker
Senior member
Posts: 541
I don't deserve these self-entitled students.
|
|
« Reply #10 on: November 30, 2011, 11:12:07 AM » |
|
Even if in principle the employment contracts for some tenure-track faculty are "at will," the fallout from firing tenure-track faculty without cause would be disastrous for the reputation of any respectable university.
But I would guess, whatever that fallout would be, it can't be conveyed that retaliation is intended to cause the college to change what it is doing. Otherwise you would be interfering in the right of two parties to do business together in whatever manner is mutually agreed. An examples of this situation? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
luckychance
|
|
« Reply #11 on: December 01, 2011, 07:09:22 AM » |
|
I think fixed term contracts are the norm for VAPs post-docs etc. But maybe I'm wrong...
That's what I thought. My minimally informed understanding was that if there was a specified time, like "your contract is from 9/1/11 to 8/31/11" then the *only* time you could be fired within that interval was if you breached the contract. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
seniorscholar
|
|
« Reply #12 on: December 01, 2011, 11:10:49 AM » |
|
I think fixed term contracts are the norm for VAPs post-docs etc. But maybe I'm wrong...
That's what I thought. My minimally informed understanding was that if there was a specified time, like "your contract is from 9/1/11 to 8/31/11" then the *only* time you could be fired within that interval was if you breached the contract. Or telephoned to say you were calling from jail because you'd been arrested and charged for "possession with intent to sell" which may or may not be specified in the contract, but certainly led us to fire the person . . . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
luckychance
|
|
« Reply #13 on: December 01, 2011, 11:30:24 AM » |
|
I think fixed term contracts are the norm for VAPs post-docs etc. But maybe I'm wrong...
That's what I thought. My minimally informed understanding was that if there was a specified time, like "your contract is from 9/1/11 to 8/31/11" then the *only* time you could be fired within that interval was if you breached the contract. I guess my statement implies that the contract lasts one day and goes backwards in time! :-) I meant 8/31/12! Oops |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 01, 2011, 11:30:50 AM by luckychance »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
