It's easy to rail against those who demand higher ethical standards when
one benefits personally from lax ethical practices.
Personal interests like "but my wife/child/friend wants a job too!"
should not be a consideration of any hiring entity. Where does it end?
Is it ok for a chair and group of faculty to decide only to hire members
of their church or their own religion, or only hire other atheists? Is
it ok for them to only hire their friends to the exclusion of all other
applicants regardless of QUANTITATIVE qualification/skill/talent (which
are frequently quantified for other purposes such as grants etc., so
this "well, everyone with a Ph.D. and the minimum credentials is
basically equally qualified" excuse often used is BS)? Maybe a
department wishes to be all white, or all Chinese, or all Jewish? Kosher?
I understand in England that there are even laws against nepotism even
in the private sector? If so, they will probably over-take us in
science soon if they haven't already.
Spousal hiring is not benign, it is not a victimless crime. It is an
unethical tragedy which is leading to many very good hard working
scientists to leave the field and their dreams, some of us who have
worked hard all our lives toward this goal of starting our own lab one
day, and were the first in our families to even go to graduate school
(and second to college at all). The "American Dream" has been dead in
the private sector for many years, is it dead in Academia too?
If you want to say "well, what about the trailing spouse? what about
their plight?" - I will leave you with the following scenarios to consider:
1) The department decides not to hire the primary recruit and the
spouse. What of the spouse? So now we have a home with one spouse
bringing in a new faculty salary, both of them are likely covered under
the one person's healthcare plans and other benefits. The unemployed
spouse has access to their spouses lab, University resources (core
facilities, library, etc.). They have a home and bills paid. With
these resources, they can likely continue much or at least some of their
research endeavors, continue to apply for positions at that or a nearby
institution as they come up (if they deem it necessary, which it might
not even be to continue their professional/research interests) and
likely even write grants submitted through the department as PI on a
guest appointment of some sort and possibly even leverage a position of
their own with said grants. Hell, their spouse might even be able to
hire them as a postech, adding an additional small salary to the home.
What of the top candidates who were not the trialing spouse? Well, one
of them will get the opportunity of a lifetime they have been dreaming
of: a tenure track position and a lab of their own. Happy day! Rightly
so, they've EARNED it!
2) The department decides to hire the primary recruit and the spouse.
Yay, happy day for the cute couple. What of the spouse? Well, they've
now got the holy grail of all science positions, a tenure track faculty
position with a lab of their own, healthy startup package (around a
million or more invested in the average hire including startup package,
salary, benefits, etc.), the home how has TWO faculty salaries - and all
is "right with the world". HOWEVER: What of the candidates whose
qualifications outweighed those of the spouse. who don't have a leading
spouse of their own to leverage a position for them? Well, they're
unemployed. No salary, no benefits, no way to pay their bills, etc.
Not ONLY that: BUT they NOW also have no way to continue even the
smallest shred of their research. They languish for a year or more
longer, not being able to publish or apply for most federal grants or
generate preliminary data. Some of their projects fall to the back
burner of their collaborators, some may even be scooped in the mean
time. All the while, this person looks "unproductive" and they fall
under the trap of the self (or departmentally/societally) fulfilling
prophecy that they are not qualified because they're not being
productive - thus making it even harder to land the next position.
Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D.
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
http://www.allthingsbugs.com/Curriculum_Vitae.pdf
On 8/20/2011 7:07 AM, Kim van der Linde wrote:
On 8/19/2011 11:07 PM, Aaron T. Dossey wrote:
Was it about unethical hiring practices like spousal hirings,
nepotism, etc.? These are RAMPANT in Academia.
I have no serious problem with spousal fires, because it means that
the hire committee/dean/chair/.... has basically concluded that hiring
the two of them is the best choice for the university, even if the
spouse is maybe not of the same level of what they otherwise could
get. Sometimes, like I have seen here where I work, the money for the
hire would not have been freed at all, and the spousal hire
effectively resulted in a extra hire. Offering spousal hires often is
part of the hiring negotiations because split families means that your
candidate is at far larger risk to keep looking for a job elsewhere
after you hire them so s/he can be with his partner again.
It is easy to rail against spousal hires if you are single, or have a
partner who has a career that is portable so you can just go where you
want to go, or when you don't care to live at the other side of the
country. It is a different story of you have a family and like to be
with you family. And universities understand the two-body problem and
spousal hires are just one way to ensure you can hire the best
candidates.
Kim
