 |
| What the Fuck? |
Anyway, I only had 2 MLA conference interviews, and then I waited. I finally learned that I was out of job #1 when some other poor sap on the job wiki posted something.
But Job #2...I lingered, and lingered. Where was my response, something, anything. Why do these fucking search committees act as if they are feudal lords from Lapland passing out the yearly goat?
What the fuck?
So after many weeks of waiting I sent a VERY polite and brief note to the search committee chair asking, "May I inquire where your search currently stands? Am I still a candidate?"
Nothing for ten days. So I wrote another similar note. Ten days is enough to wait, right?
Then yesterday I heard from them:
"Dear Anti-Adam. It is impossible for us to communicate with conference interview candidates during the search process. When we hire someone we will contact you."
Q: Is this right? Is this how it's done? They can't simply say, "We're on to campus visits. You're not included." Can't they say, "Sorry, we're behind schedule." What HR nightmare is in place that they can't or sometimes simply won't reply to candidate questions? Is this normal?
I, too, have been biting my fist at Adam's updates. There are more of us second-stringers than there are golden boys. Or maybe the golden boys just hang out on the "College Bliss" blog where everyone gets a 2/2 tenure-track job with a spousal hire (or included concubine if no spouse available) before the ink is even dry on the diss. Anyway.
ReplyDeleteIn my experience, this isn't normal. Everyone I've contacted after a conference interview, regardless of the school, has been pretty transparent--"we're still making decisions on campus visits," "we've invited two people to campus and neither of them are you," "the search has been cancelled--spare some change, mister?" But at the very least they should be able to tell you more or, if not, at least be able to tell you why they can't tell you more. What you got in the mail strikes me as passive-agressive HR twaddle. They've probably got an inside candidate or else bigger issues that are shutting them up.
I think your experience may not be normal, but it certainly happens. Different institutions seem to have different responsibilities to the HR powers and one of those things gets manifested as an opaque process like you describe.
ReplyDeleteAnd, on the other matter, I like hearing the occasional good news like Adam's.
In my experience, faculty also sometimes assume that HR requirements are much more stringent than they really are. They may believe they are not permitted to communicate whatsoever with candidates other than through official channels even if that is not actually a policy. Most faculty, after all, are not well versed in employment law.
ReplyDeleteIn my experience as a job search committee member, and during my own job search days, this is how it is done, whether in the US, Canada or UK. The top picks might decline the interview offer [oh yes, this happens plenty, regardless of how tight the job market is ... if you think highly of them as a job candidate, chances are good that other universities where they've applied also think the same], or later on during the interview they may make space and equipment requests that are just impossible for the university to deliver on, so the "safe mode" is to tell nobody nothing, in the hopes that if the short list doesn't pan out then the "second-stringers" haven't also moved on...it leaves you twisting in the wind, but of course the university is going to have a very different perspective on the impact of you lingering on as the process winds along.
ReplyDeleteFolks on search committes where I work have to sign a blood oath promising not only that they won't say a word about the search but also that they won't communicate with candidates. Everything has to come from HR.
ReplyDeleteIf candidates have any questions, they can call (or write) HR, but the only response they'll get is similar to what anti-Adam heard: "The search is still in progress." Period.
Of course, this seems harsh/inhumane, but even though loose lips won't sink ships, they WILL produce lots of litigation.
I interviewed with a school last year who invited folks out for campus visits (not me), rejected them all, and then invited out a second round.
ReplyDeleteBasically, they can't say you are out of the running for sure because you really might not be. Chances are somebody else will take the job but who knows?
This isn't really meant to get your hopes up, because chances are good that one of those folks will take an offer.
BUT, there are plenty of good jobs still coming out. We have one that will be posted soon, for example. :)
This is what I was going to say. You may be 5th on the list, but if after two rounds of campus visits (2 at a time) no one fits all qualifications, especially the poor working conditions for low pay one, you will be contacted.
DeleteI always liked this old RYS chestnut about search committees:
ReplyDeleteEspecially these:
2. Write a real fucking ad with real information. Don't be coy. Don't be subtle. Ask what you're looking for. Tell us what the job ACTUALLY entails. Don't beat around the bush. You get so many lousy applications because you write such vague and (often) misleading ads.
3. Be reasonable with expectations. Don't ask for someone who's a specialist in synchronized diving, but who also can fly a rocketship and make party dresses out of burlap and twine. I know you have these NEEDS, but put yourself in the place of an applicant and ask, "Could I do all of that shit? Would I?"
7. In the second round, when you ask for ancillary materials, don't pose your request like it's a FUCKING RIDDLE. When you say, "send evidence of successful teaching," do you want a video of me sending my class up in hysterics with my Perez Hilton routine? Do you want something from my boss? You want teaching evaluations from students? You want a self-evaluation? You want to know about my teaching awards? Can I just send you my RapeMyProfessor page, the one where 46% of the posts are either from me or my pal Big Eddie?
10. DON'T TREAT ME LIKE I'M AN ENEMY TO YOUR HAPPINESS. I don't care if you were FORCED to be on the search committee. It's your duty this semester and do it well. Pretend like it fucking matters. Because, baby, it does.
I wonder how people end up so jaded.
DeleteI've served on search committees before, and am again, and I have to say that I'm really excited and hopeful that we're going to find somebody awesome. I know of a ton of great people still on the market and I want to bring one of them here next year.
If it would make that person appear faster and get here and get started I'd probably shit rainbows if I could. Seriously. The rest of our committee is the same. We practically threw a party when we found out we had a line and would get to run a search.
Maybe you could sneak individual cans for any lavatory stalls a female candidate might visit into the budget -- you know, to avoid turning off said candidates and/or creating discriminatory hiring conditions?
DeleteWe always have a woman on the search committee to discreetly ask the candidate if such precautions are necessary. She then helps the committee arrange the campus interview so that it is conducted out of phase with the female candidate's cycle. At least, I always thought that was why we had a woman on the committee.
DeleteMy obsessive reading of the Chronicle job forums suggests a divide amongst SC chairs. Some appear to be sympathetic to the job seekers, and will provide whatever information they are able to in response to polite inquiries. Others absolutely detest any contact from job applicants, saying such attempts reek of desperation and anxiety that is unbecoming of future academics.
ReplyDeleteThe prevailing advice seems to be: pretend you don't give a shit.
I work for a really litigation-shy institution, and we are certainly allowed to say, "While our position is considered open until filled, you should know that we have made an offer [or: scheduled our campus visitors, or whatever]." Asses are not exposed that way, as both are true facts.
ReplyDelete