Tips for people pursuing 'couple-hires'?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks: 

Lots of people (reasonably!) have complicated feelings about couple hires – to be clear, the following questions are partly about strategy, but partly about how and whether this can be done in a transparent and upfront way.

If your goal is to get a couple hire, should both members of the couple apply for all the same jobs (when reasonable, like if both work in the same area or they’re open area searches)? If you do this, should you mention these facts in the letter?

Or should just one member of the couple apply – whoever has a better shot for whatever reason at some particular job, say, one’s from a “leiterific” program and the other isn’t, or one’s research aligns better – and bring up the partner if given an offer?

Do the answers to these questions change when there’s one job vs when a department is hiring multiple people?

Good query, and I don't know the answers!

Do any readers have any helpful insights to share?

Comments

[half of a pair]

When I was on the market, I was told not to bring up a partner until I had an offer in hand. I don't see why you wouldn't both apply for jobs that you are each qualified for, but I doubt that changes the strategy of (non-)disclosure. This is, I think, the standard advice for junior philosophers, but I've seen senior philosophers handle partner issues with more transparency.

I don't know how the calculus changes when a department is advertising multiple lines. My gut instinct says you should only change strategy in that case if you think you both have a good shot at a first-round interview. At the initial stages of the process, a department is unlikely to pursue things with your partner, even if they really like your file, unless they're independently interested in them. And there's always the risk that, if you're on the cusp of making it to the next round, knowing that you come with partner complications will hurt your chances (even though, strictly speaking, that information shouldn't be considered).

[two-bodied person]

One thing to stress is that context will matter. Large universities can make more hires and hence more spousal hires than small ones, elite more than non-elite, etc. Similarly, field and subfield matter, as two people with the same esoteric research interest will be harder to hire on at the same place than two people who work on different subjects.

But in any case, as a two-bodied person myself, I’d also be glad to get more advice on this.

[senior person]

I would say unless you are senior or the non-applying partner is in incredibly high demand (e.g. there are clear markers that they are being pursued by similar departments, they are asked to give talks at similar departments, etc.) or you have specific reason to think the department in question would view it as a plus to your application that you "come with" your partner, you should never disclose this stuff until the offer stage (but you should always both apply if you are both remotely qualified, even if it is a stretch, since sometimes that helps with logistical stuff for actually making two hires, though I think that is rarely actually even helpful).

[senior person]

Also, there might be other kinds of very specific reasons to disclose, e.g. you are each in high demand generally/you have strong reasons to think you will be competitive on the market, and the department you are applying to is, say, a strong one but in a location that many people find undesirable and so they have trouble retaining faculty, or something like that. But I still wouldn't do it at the application stage; I'd wait, see if you get an interview, and if you do, try to get as much info as you can (without bringing it up in your actual interview) about how that department tends to deal with partner hires, whether it's even possible, do research, and then maybe, possibly, after doing that research bring it up post-first round interview or during the fly out. But again: risky.

[Richard Yetter Chappell]

I agree with the above advice:
* both apply if (but only if) you each feasibly fit the job description
* don't request (or even mention your hope for) a spousal hire until you have an offer in hand.

But I would add:
* Consider making it transparent on your website (not in your officially submitted job materials) that your partner is also an academic.

The latter advice is risky, as some departments may consider two-body situations a difficult obstacle to hiring. But for other departments, they're an opportunity - a chance to convince the Dean to allow the department an extra hire. I think it can be worth increasing your chances at two-body-friendly institutions, at the cost of reducing your chances at places where there was little hope of finding a two-body solution anyway. But YMMV.

[senior person]

Also, if you're a woman or BIPOC or out-queer you may be offered a meeting on a fly out with some kind of diversity and inclusion rep. Those meetings are typically completely confidential (though make sure that is true!), and you can ask them questions including whether the university does make partner hires, how often, etc. (along with basically anything else you want!).

[anecdotal]

Anecdotally I have used request for a spouse hire as a soft way of backing off an offer. it worked effectively: a verbal offer didn’t materialize into a written one, without me declining.

[Jenn Wang]

There's good advice above. Definitely both apply if you both fit the description - I've heard that it may be easier to convince the higher-ups to grant a spousal hire if the other person was also a serious candidate for the position. And anecdotally, it's much more common for two-body problems to be solved by spousal hire vs. from two advertised positions.

[Bill V.]

A few years ago we had a case where a couple applied to job-share a single job we had on offer. That was an intriguing strategy, and they both seemed good, but we ended up not interviewing them. Some of the department felt like it was too complicated and risky--without tenure standards in place for such situations, or even rules about how to divide up the teaching releases we offer new folks, and so on, it didn't seem worth pursuing. In retrospect, I would have advised them to apply independently and then suggest the job-share or request a spousal hire if one of them got an offer.

A year or two after that, in another search, we made an offer to someone and then they asked if we would do a partner hire. The department vetted the second person, who wouldn't have made the shortlist in a regular search in part because they were ABD but overall they seemed acceptable and the department was ready to move forward. But the dean was suspicious because the pair were not legally married (I argued that common law counts). The person we made the original offer to might have been using this as a delay tactic anyway, since they ended up accepting a job at a fancier place.

I'd say that declaring a desire for a partner hire during application is never going to count as a reason for the department to hire you. (Just like saying you want to be in the geographical region isn't a reason the department should hire you.) And it might work against you just because it is not the norm and there are so many excellent candidates on the market that universities don't need to take any risks. Another point is that early in the job search year, deans don't know how many ongoing searches will fail, and so they will likely say no instead of committing to a line they don't have funding for. Later in the year, once some searches have failed, the dean might be willing to divert one of those spare lines to a spousal hire.

[The Real SLAC Prof]

Many institutions do not have the possibility of doing "couple-hires," as something that can be asked for after an offer for a single position is made. At my current institution, the process by which departments request lines takes over a year, and there are no "extra" lines left over. For us, if we are advertising one position, there is no way we are going to be able to get a second tenure-stream line later in the process. People who are not going to accept a single position and apply anyway hoping for a couple-hire will be disappointed, and if they wait until the offer is made to show their hand, they could end up causing a failed search. I understand that the philosophy job market is a Hobbesian state of nature, but I would hope that if two positions are a non-negotiable boundary for jobseekers they would disclose at the outset for the good of everyone.

While disclosing at the outset will not benefit couples when we just have one position, it very well could benefit couples to disclose when we have two advertised positions. Having been in this situation recently, I would have been happy to hire a couple, but many couples did not self-identify in their letters. Given the volume of applicants, I think it would have been prudent for couples to self-identify rather that just hope they both made the short list.

[Chris]

The Real SLAC Prof wrote "I would hope that if two positions are a non-negotiable boundary for jobseekers they would disclose at the outset for the good of everyone"
and I would hope that, if "there is no way we are going to be able to get a second tenure-stream line later in the process" the university would disclose this at the outset for the good of everyone...

It would be a nice equilibrium if the universities that absolutely won't do any spousal hiring would advertise that somehow and if applicants who absolutely wouldn't take a job without a job for their partner would make it known in such cases. But the truth is, for many universities and applicants, things are rarely so absolute.

It works both ways, I take it. For many, it makes sense not to disclose because (1) the university hasn't make it clear up front that there's no hope of a spousal hire and (2) the possibility of a spousal hire is not a "deal breaker" for the applicant - just something they're hoping to be able to negotiate later. (This is often because a job for one person is better than no job for either partner).

Of course, maybe the REAL SLAC is right that it is better to self disclose when there are multiple positions. But, I don't think it is unreasonable to think that, for many universities, if there are multiple positions advertised, there is at least the possibility that the University is in a good enough financial shape to negotiate some kind of position for a spouse (even if it isn't a regular, full time position), and even if such a position doesn't materialize for a year, etc.

[senior person]

@the Real SLAC Prof... it would be extraordinarily rare for people to solve two body problems (or get jobs at all!) if they did what you suggest. It seems like a strange thing to demand of job seekers. Yes, it IS hobbesian--and the losers are overwhelmingly job candidates, not departments/universities that are swimming in options. I think the onus is on us, the hirers, to make sure we have enough options that we can hire someone.

[The Real SLAC Prof]

@ senior person: I'm not sure where you see the "demand" in anything I wrote above. The OP asked for tips, and I provided them, focusing specifically on SLACs and people who will only take a position if it can solve their two body problems.

And, to reiterate, in a recent multiple position search, many applicants with two body problems took the standard advice offered on this thread and didn't self-identify which actively worked against the possibility of a couple hire in the rare case where one was possible, at this type of institution. Again, just something for jobseekers to think about. My general advice for people looking for couple hires at SLACs would be: self-identify or don't apply.

A failed search creates headaches for hiring departments, but it can also be career ending for the person who would have been hired if not for the failed search.

It takes a village to have a humane job market; I encourage everyone to do their part.