next »

[theodosia]

I have a very tricky situation and I'm not sure what--if anything--to do about it. 

There's an academic couple in my department:  one spouse has a tt position while the other spouse is  currently unemployed.  (I am deliberately omitting the genders here, because I don't want this to turn into a man/woman thing...)  The unemployed spouse has a Ph.D. in the same discipline (English) and has been looking for academic jobs both on our campus and at schools in the surrounding area, but to no avail. 

The tt spouse is up for tenure this year, and there are rumors afloat that this person and their unemployed academic spouse have been unofficially sharing this tt position all along.  More specifically, that the unemployed spouse has been doing all of the research, writing and scholarship while the tt spouse has been doing the service, teaching, and advising.  The tt spouse and unemployed spouse have published a few co-authored articles together--and the gossip mill on campus says that the unemployed spouse researched, wrote and revised these articles solo, not as part of collaborative effort.

Similarly, the tongue-waggers around campus say the same for the tt spouse's single-authored essays:  that the unemployed spouse is the one who actually researched, wrote and revised them.  Ditto for conference papers, etc. 

The motive for the unemployed spouse to do this--again, according to the gossip mill--was two-fold:  (1) in the short-term to help the tt spouse with the day-to-day workload and with the promotion requirements, and thus to ensure that at least one of them had a secure academic position, and (2) in the long-term, to help tt spouse secure tenure in the hopes that perhaps sometime afterward, the tt spouse might be in a position to get the unemployed spouse a position (be it adjunct, contract, visiting, or, hopefully somewhere down the road, tt)

Again, this is all rumor.  But, I am hearing these comments from a variety of people and places around campus.
I don't want this gossip to unfairly cast dispersions over a colleague's otherwise good record.  But, I also can't help but wonder if there might be any truth to it?  (Where there's smoke...?) 

What--if anything--can I do? 
What--if anything--would you do?

[larryc]

So the complaint is that the institution is getting the effort of two PhDs for a single salary? I can see the problem.  No wait, actually I cannot see the problem.

Academic couples often combine their efforts in all kinds of ways. You cannot get to the bottom of these accusations, so you should not try. This is the most malicious gossip-mongering possible. Shut it down if you can, refuse to participate if you cannot.

[history_anon]

By your own account, there is no evidence of any wrong-doing on the part of either member of this academic couple.  Tenure and promotion votes are among the most serious of academic responsibilities, given the life-changing consequences they entail.  You should never allow rumor or gossip to affect your vote.  Just read the file and vote accordingly.

[gennidad]

Pretty much what Larry said.  Unless you have real proof of misconduct by the couple. Sit down and STFU.

[proftowanda]

Not to inject gender into this unnecessarily, but the age-old term is gendered for reasons:

This is what many a faculty wife has done for eons. 

Not until recently has there been at least some serious, long-overdue recognition of this (beyond the line in the acknowledgments by a book's "author") occurring in the past.

If it still is occurring in the present, well, that past is not that long ago, and that means raising this issue in the present will go nowhere.  Plus, of course, it appears that you have absolutely no evidence -- as the "author" still is very much with us, and the papers of the "author" are decades from being unearthed in an archive with signs of spousal contributions . . . or not, putting ancient rumors to rest.

So for now, the only question is why you are among the tongue-waggers. 

[oatmeal]

OP--There is nothing you can do and there is nothing you should do. These are unsubstantiated rumors and pretty horrible rumors. If there is any "foul play" then someone will find it, not you, and the institution can make a decision. But these sort of rumors are best avoided. In fact, you should do nothing to further the gossip.

[wiley]

Good for them.

[seniorscholar]

Not to inject gender into this unnecessarily, but the age-old term is gendered for reasons:

This is what many a faculty wife has done for eons. 

Exactly: proftowanda beat me to it.

[tuxedo_cat]

What--if anything--can I do? 
What--if anything--would you do?

Nothing, and
nothing.

For all the reasons expressed above.   

[kaysixteen]

There are two issues here--

1) rumor-mongering-- OP seems to acknowledge that there is no actual evidence behind these suspicions... on that basis I would agree with the advice given above.  That said...

2) let us say that these are not rumors, but that smoking-gun proof of this behavior exists... now what?  Surely we cannot really say that the tt spouse ought to get tenure on the basis of what amounts to fraud?  This cannot be fair to hus single colleagues who actually have to do all that work themselves, now can it?  I suspect strongly that none of us would say that a PhD candidate whose spouse actually researched and wrote his dissertation ought to receive that PhD anyhow?

[msparticularity]

There are two issues here--

1) rumor-mongering-- OP seems to acknowledge that there is no actual evidence behind these suspicions... on that basis I would agree with the advice given above.  That said...

2) let us say that these are not rumors, but that smoking-gun proof of this behavior exists... now what?  Surely we cannot really say that the tt spouse ought to get tenure on the basis of what amounts to fraud?  This cannot be fair to hus single colleagues who actually have to do all that work themselves, now can it?  I suspect strongly that none of us would say that a PhD candidate whose spouse actually researched and wrote his dissertation ought to receive that PhD anyhow?

I do think there might be room for some concern if there really is actual evidence that the TT colleague is not a strong enough scholar to merit tenure alone, since there is no guarantee at all that the spouse will be there forever. This really does seem unlikely to me, though, on a couple of counts. Do we really believe that: a) an essentially weak candidate has managed to publish, give research talks, discuss research in the community at large, and get hired without anyone noticing that they don't really know that much about their own work? and b) a spouse who is actually the much stronger scholar has sacrificed his/own career and devoted years of scholarly productivity to work for which s/he is not receiving his/her appropriate share of the credit?

I would suggest that there's a likelier scenario here: the TT colleague is the stronger scholar of the two, and also enjoys a productive research partnership with his/her spouse, who is not as strong a researcher individually. The publication credits quite accurately reflect the division of labor: the TT candidate has done some work alone, and some with the spouse. In addition--as is the case for many of us--the spouse has provided very valuable research support, including reference checking, proofreading, editing, and so on, for the sole-authored pubs.

[voxprincipalis]

Is tenure competitive at your institution? I don't mean "is it hard to get?" (OK, I sort of mean that too) but "are there limited tenure slots available for which people must compete?" Because if it's the second one, I'm with Kay -- passing off the work of others as one's own is unacceptable in any circumstance. If the fraud is committed in pursuit of tenure/promotion, that adds insult to injury.

I think that if true, it's reprehensible behavior and TT Spouse ought to be fired. In any case, the university would be well advised to investigate the matter *thoroughly* before approving tenure.

VP

[infopri]

Again, this is all rumor.  But, I am hearing these comments from a variety of people and places around campus.
I don't want this gossip to unfairly cast dispersions over a colleague's otherwise good record.  But, I also can't help but wonder if there might be any truth to it?  (Where there's smoke...?) 

What--if anything--can I do? 
What--if anything--would you do?

You say that this is all rumor, which suggests to me that there isn't a shred of actual evidence supporting these rumors.  The notion of "where there's smoke..." is the very fuel upon which rumors thrive.  Don't feed the fire.

As kay and vox say, if there is truth to the rumors, then the TT spouse certainly should not be awarded tenure.  However, if these rumors are as prevalent as you seem to believe, then the P&T committee must already be aware of them and will, presumbably, do its due diligence in investigating them.  Therefore, there is nothing at all for you to do except to STFU and MYOB.

[larryc]

I suspect the person in question is a victim of an academic mobbing in progress.

As to an investigation--how on earth would that work? "Did your spouse write this paper?" "No."

What happens next? Subpoena their computer files? Email? Check old security cam footage at the Huntington to see who was really on that research trip? What evidence could there possibly be?

You cannot ever know for certain, there will never be any evidence beyond rumors. So you end up with a bitter, newly tenured colleague and a divided department. And that is your best case scenario.

[infopri]

As to an investigation--how on earth would that work? "Did your spouse write this paper?" "No."

What happens next? Subpoena their computer files? Email? Check old security cam footage at the Huntington to see who was really on that research trip? What evidence could there possibly be?

You cannot ever know for certain, there will never be any evidence beyond rumors. So you end up with a bitter, newly tenured colleague and a divided department. And that is your best case scenario.

Oh, I agree with you, larryc.  My point was that, whatever happens, it's the P&T committee's problem, not the OP's.