First of all, most spousal hires that I've seen get new, specially created positions. They're not outcompeting or displacing anyone. Second, you're assuming that the primary hire has a lab that their spouse can use. But what if the primary hire is a historian or mathematician and their spouse is an ecologist or, worse, a biochemist?
Also, please stop invoking nepotism. That word refers to hiring relatives of a person *in power*. If a dean or department chair (or even an established faculty member) insisted that their spouse be hired when they were not the best person for the job, that would be nepotism. Being or hiring a "package deal" is not. Finally, I would propose that relaxing the emphasis on "quantitative" qualifications is probably a good thing. This emphasis leads to piecemeal, shallow work that churns out large numbers of papers and an emphasis on flashy, fashionable topics at the expense of others that often have more depth. Of course, this should be changed across the board, but hiring at least some people by a different pathway should be healthy for a university. Oh, and for the record, I am single. Jane Shevtsov On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Aaron T. Dossey <[email protected]> wrote: > 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<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 >> > -- ------------- Jane Shevtsov Ecology Ph.D. candidate, University of Georgia co-founder, www.worldbeyondborders.org "All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers... Each one owes infinitely more to the human race than to the particular country in which he was born." --Francois Fenelon, theologian and writer (1651-1715)
