Where does "mental health" come into it? Was that meant to be something else?
I heard a related case of someone defending their dissertation. They had kids (twins, I believe) and for some reason weren't notified of the date of their defense and thus didn't arrange a baby-sitter. Received a call on the day, so went in with the kids. Apparently the rampaging kids contributed in no small part to the examiners being relatively easy on the student.
So: if someone does the dick move of scheduling a tenure meeting while you're on maternity leave, bring the kid in and have the arse hole hold the kid while you give your talk (or whatever it is people do in these things.)
I've heard several anecdotes about female attorneys on maternity leave during their review for partner. They always make partner in these stories. If only I could push my review back by two months, I could try to contribute to the anecdotes!
Well, if you're needed for the vote - if it's an actual "tell us why you are awesome and deserve tenure" meeting followed by a vote - then obviously it shouldn't happen while you're on leave, because you need to be in it.
If you aren't needed to be there, if it's just a committee looking at your work and assessing its awesomeness and hence your tenurability, then... you don't need to be there and the vote can go ahead.
I may be missing something here.
4 -- I spent several years playing for the other team on that, and this was my experience as well. One certainly doesn't want to be seen as openly penalizing pregnancy or childbirth, sure, but ime the more important factor is that we really didn't say no* all that often, having winnowed effectively in prior years. (Including having come a year or two earlier to the conclusion that a particular associate wasn't ever going to be nominated, but had some sort of value such that 'up or out' wasn't a net gain.)
* I'm not including sending someone to OC status for a year or two to resolve a particular issue as "no."
Certainly reasonable accommodations should be made, but in the scenario in question I don't understand why one would want the decision to be pushed back.
Yawnoc is correct. This part of the world doesn't have to keep turning; pretending otherwise is bad faith.
In the law business, a nontrivial percentage of maternity leave takers don't return. Promoting to partner during leave can be an incentive to come back.
Id think that a formal denial of a promotion during maternity leave is asking for a lawsuit. At my firm we don't have any exact timetable for partnership, and don't ever make a formal denial, so the issue doesn't come up.
6: Yeah, I'm not sure if these firms had a similar winnowing policy in place. It was more about the joke that if you're going to get pregnant, ideally you should be on maternity leave during the partnership decision because it's the one time that being female may actually help you advance.
(Only semi-hypothetically the vote was no. And it was predictable that this would be a highly controversial case. It was not a case of insufficient productivity, but rather new wave/old wave styles of productivity, which had (hypothetically) caused a big fuss on the 4th year review.)
Another vote that the idea that you can't ever be away from your job at a critical point is absurd. I'm thinking of surgeons or something whose presence and absence are critical to an actual life, and they get to call in sick and reschedule surgeries (or a replacement is found), right? I don't think the attitude is atypical that in academia that dedication to your job requires dumbass displays like showing up at critical events despite extraordinary circumstances, but it seems like a really myopic view of your importance in the workplace (or world).
The candidate's actual presence is not allowed, actually. Once your package is submitted, you're moot.
14: well, then, why would the question arise? You're on leave, you aren't allowed into the meeting, you aren't needed there... what's the problem?
I'm sort of with 5 and 8. If there's anything she needs to be actively involved with, then it should wait. But if it's just a decision where she's already had all the input she's going to have, it doesn't seem as though waiting until her leave is over does her any good.
Or, is there some clock ticking where she needs to find another job within X months after being denied tenure? Because that would make scheduling the decision while she was on leave a lousy thing to do.
My argument is that it's an unnecessary jackass move to tell someone they got turned down when they're in the hospital or a few days out from the hospital. Mental anguish and stress. Your job can pause for six weeks, and that includes life-altering decisions made about your future.
I actually don't know if the hypothetical person wanted the vote pushed back, so the conflict is purely within the Geebie family. When I heard the outcome, I squawked and manufactured the whole outrage in my head.
It was not a case of insufficient productivity, but rather new wave/old wave styles of productivity, which had (hypothetically) caused a big fuss on the 4th year review.
Ai yi yi. That's the worst.
I am pretty much with 17, though of course different hypothetical people might well prefer it the other way -- not wanting the decision hanging over their heads for the whole leave.
17: ah, right, I see. But I'm personally kind of with 20: get the damn thing over with. (Plus if you tell them the bad news right after they give birth, they'll still be high from the entonox. Painless!)
Yeah, I think in general in situations where it can be pushed back it should be so that the candidate doesn't have to start interviewing again a few weeks postpartum if the outcome is poor. Maybe it's a moot point in academia, though, since I'm guessing there's more of a fixed schedule for when people interview.
The OB could. Just deliver the news. "Congratulations, it's a boy with an unemployed mother."
Or it could just be a couple of points on the old Apgar scale.
I don't think the attitude is atypical that in academia that dedication to your job requires dumbass displays like showing up at critical events despite extraordinary circumstances, but it seems like a really myopic view of your importance in the workplace (or world).
I've definitely seen the attitude you're describing. Sometimes it's part of a career self-promotion strategy that emphasizes that your very presence in the room (rather than any specific tangible thing that you produce) is essential. This attitude annoys the heck out of me, and at the same time I wonder if I should be doing more of that myself.
Also my dad has been peculiarly fixated on how we ought to be sending our kids to private school. And my dad and my brother are officially the first people to (inadvertently) make Hokey-Pokey feel awkward about his gender-bending. They were genuinely being jerks in their reaction, but I don't think they intended to make Pokey unhappy.
I'm actually having a lovely time. I just was sharing what made me roll my eyes.
22: Yeah, that's a moot point here. In a situation like this, I'm sure the school will keep her on for a year while she looks for other jobs. There's only one hiring season a year, so one can't just get a job immediately either way.
If the candidate really doesn't want to know, can't she just not look at the results? Why does the decision need to be put off? Presumably the results are sent by letter, not by phone call.
I think the gossip trail wrecks 29.
A couple of weeks before I was due to resubmit my D.Phil thesis I got diagnosed with a thyroid tumour. There was no procedure to allow me defer for a few weeks or months, so an extraordinary vote had to go all the way up to some senior university-wide committee level, and they graciously granted me a 12-week extension. I then ended up with a pretty nasty post-op infection that meant I was on hospital for much of those 12-weeks. It sort of sucked to be me.
It'd have been nice [ahem] if there'd have been some more formal and routine procedure I could have gone through.
7 was posted in ignorance of 14. That makes it quite a bit less cut-and-dry. I get super-stressed out knowing that decisions that affect my life are being made and held back. For instance, around now people are getting together to decide whether I should get The Big Bonus or The Shaft but I won't find out which for at least three weeks and two weeks from now I'll be a nervous wreck even though it doesn't make all that much of a difference either way.
Which is to say, I would want them to go ahead and make and convey the decision ASAP, even if it caused mental anguish, because it would cause more to sit around Not Knowing.
||
You guys are the kind of family-oriented reprobates who might know something about pirated digital copies of children's books.
I happen to know an 8 year old boy who was supposed to read Fourth Grade Fuss by Johanna Hurwitz over Thanksgiving break, but who didn't bring it with us to his cousin's house. We can't find it at any local bookstores or libraries, and there isn't a Kindle edition.
I know the world of websites that makes Halford cry has included places to trade ebooks, including for a while a place to get academic books. But is there any way I can quickly get my hands on an electronic edition of this book?
|>
All the good pirate book sites are indexed in Chinese. You need to find a Chinese graduate student.
So I'm on maternity leave, and also in the process of putting together my pretenure review package, which is due before I come back to work. I'll get a decision shortly after I go back next semester. In this case, though, it was my choice - I could have pushed the whole thing back a year. Chose not to because, frankly, at my institution you have to screw up pretty badly in order to get non-renewed at this point. And I want the option of going up for tenure at the regular time, assuming I get my book out by then. I can always take the extra year later on, if I decide I need it.
In the case of the OP, as the employee I'd want to know sooner rather than later in order to be on the job market this year. It would suck worse to find out too late to apply for any jobs for next year. Although I suspect a significant number of people who don't get tenure just leave academia entirely - that's what I think I'd do, anyway.
||
I'm watching two old enemies go at it head to surrogate head on a professional listserv. Many others weighing in. One of them did something amazingly bone headed. And then tried to cover it up. He is a dick and always has been. The other is ripping into him mercilessly. This one is not really a dick but he has been a dick to me. This just blew up but the fall out is amazing. There will be news stories I'm sure. There will be professional repercussions. I thought was full yesterday. Mmmmm....delicious.
I hope that doesn't make me bad.
|>
This just blew up but the fall out is amazing. There will be news stories I'm sure.
[Insert Satisfied-Mr-Burns gesture here]
[Insert Satisfied-Mr-Burns gesture here]
Well I've got my answer to 36.2. Oh, well....Smithers!
Eh, I'd feel bad for any grad students or junior faculty who are caught in the crossfire. But no sympathy for tenured professors, because theirs is one of those rare jobs where, if you don't want to act like a dick, you really don't have to.
Send provosts, K1s, and money. The shit has hit the fan.
As probably the commenter most likely to be denied tenure in the future, 35.2 seems to me like the most important consideration, depending on the timing. The difference between having one year to hunt for a new job and two years to do so could be huge.
I know someone who's very good but was denied tenure somewhere on the west coast this year, and I really want to know how his job search is going, but don't feel like I know him well enough to say "hey, about your whole getting fired thing..."
You want me to ask? Just give me a cell number.
I didn't write 35, but I could have!
I think there should be a way to delay the vote, not because of one's mental health per se, but if there are appeals that are contractually time-sensitive, one would want to be in a position to avail oneself of the procedures. Not optimal when having a baby.
The world keeps turning? Sez who? $0.02: tenure policies are not actually handed down by God.
but if there are appeals that are contractually time-sensitive, one would want to be in a position to avail oneself of the procedures. Not optimal when having a baby.
Fact! Excellent point.
And in fact, she is undertaking appeals-type steps with a newborn in tow, I believe.
Or so the mullahs would have you believe.
The psychological issue, imho, could cut either way (waiting or not). And sop is that tenure denials are followed by a year (after the year in which the denial came down) still on the job. So for hypothetical person, still job having in 14-15 (presuming this hypothetically just happened). And not realistic to go on the academic job market at this point this year if hypothetical new mother hadn't already hypothetically been planning to do so.
It's the *appeals* that seem to me to make the difference her-- especially in a hypothetically controversial case where the 'no' surrounded hypothetically different styles of productivity which higher level Uni committees may overturn. Those are typically on very tight time clocks, and require much effort and often lawyers (when conditions are such that , say, AAUP lawyers need to be involved) in order to win. Hypothetically.
So I vote on those grounds that it was a dick move to vote when they did, and not give it even another couple of weeks for candidate to get home from hospital and in less physical pain.
ugh "make the difference here"
Didn't Neddy Merrill, erstwhile poster at Edge of the American West, get tenure on appeal after an initial denial?
After searching, yes: here and here.
50 And not realistic to go on the academic job market at this point this year if hypothetical new mother hadn't already hypothetically been planning to do so.
That seems circumstance-dependent. Some application deadlines are later, and sending off a CV and a few slight modifications of older statements wouldn't take a lot of work.
essear-- right; but presumably applicant in this position is applying primarily for junior positions, which means having the referees ready to go with letters & having already contacted them.Still think it was totally shitty to do (hypothetically), on grounds of what's required for successful appeals and timing of those.
LizardBreath-- don't know that case. It's rare, but it does happen. More likely to win when something shitty/untoward was up with the initial decision or process --especially anything actionable... Hypothetically.
I'm chiming in late to point out that this discussion depends a lot on how long maternity leave lasts - in Canada, the context I know best, it would mean waiting up to a year. Very different than 6wks, which is the usual American allowance, right?
Seems like very little couldn't be paused for 6 weeks.