Adjunct Faculty being Replaced with Tenure Track Faculty-Good for Students but Bad for Adjuncts

At many universities adjunct faculty have unionized in recent years, even at schools without faculty unions. At UMass Boston there are plans to replace adjunct faculty with full time tenure track faculty. As the cost of adjunct faculty increases due to union contracts this may be a new trend. On the one hand many say that having more full time faculty is good for students. But it will cost many adjunct faculty their jobs. It will be interesting to see how this plays out at other schools that have recently unionized: Northeastern, Boston University, Tufts, Bentley and McGill to name a few.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2016/08/umb_on_edge_as_layoffs_loom

The way non-unionized adjuncts are treated is shameful, and if it leads to more permanent hires with decent salaries and benefits, I’d say it is a good thing. Some short term pain, but long term gain.

Also good for those seeking tenure-track positions, so I’m not sure this even is bad for the professoriate.

Would the overall number of professor positions go up or down with this move?

But what are the chances of a school hiring an existing adjunct as a tenure track professor versus hiring a freshly minted Ph.D.?

I think there’s a big difference between fields where many adjuncts are people who want, but can’t find, tenure track jobs - such as the humanities departments - and fields with lots of opportunities outside academia, where a good number of adjuncts see those jobs as interesting and prestigious side work, and not something they’re trying to make a living with.

An in-between option is to hire more non-tenure-track lecturers, who are paid a decent wage but are less of a commitment on both sides.

Many tenure track hires are not “freshly minted” as doing a post-doc or two is not unusual for PhDs. I see no particular reason why existing adjuncts would not be as competitive as the post-docs, depending on the position.

That is why it is short term pain-- existing adjuncts could lose out. But if it makes progress in fixing the shortage of jobs for talented PhD grads, then I think it is beneficial in the long run.

@sylvan8798 When the unionization campaigns were underway in Boston the local media ran stories of adjuncts who had been in such a situation for over 10 years, trying to cobble together a living. Several interviewed indicated that they had done little or no research over that period. A research university would not find that to be a promising thing in hiring a tenure track professor.

^That’s true, although there are a number of places where research is less emphasized. Not to mention, that adjuncts would not be expected to have kept up a research program on their own. If the candidate had a solid, compatible research interest and had demonstrated other qualities the school wanted (teaching credentials, other service, etc.) they could still be viable. Overall, I think it would be a positive for the many adjuncts who are trying to cobble a career and are interested in tenure track positions which have been dwindling over the years.

But some adjuncts had tenure track positions, were denied tenure, and ended up as adjuncts at other schools.

Ultimately this will lead to converting some adjuncts to tenures, while better treating the remaining adjuncts. Current treatment that forcing adjuncts into welfare is our country’s shame.

Adjuncts should be used as little as possible.

The positions will be converted but not with the incumbents.

@TomSrOfBoston, it’s like free trade or any policy change: some will win and some will lose, but will this lead to an overall change in the number of faculty positions?

One more vote for treat professors like professors- support, resources, office, benefits, etc. Adjuncts are poorly treated.

In some cases there can be a benefit to adjuncts – I studied business undergrad and we had a partner in a tax law practice teach tax accounting and a partner at a Big 4 firm teach auditing. Their real world experience was great to have mixed in with the coursework. Of course these are not typical adjuncts, these men had full time jobs and taught a class or two because they loved to teach.

My sister is an adjunct at a college that unionized a while back and so far it has not impacted the number of courses she has been given to teach (and she gets better pay and medical benefits now). I don’t expect they would hire her as a tenure track prof. since she has no PhD.

"Adjuncts should be used as little as possible. "

Well, that’s a bit of an overstatement. Adjuncts often bring real-life experience into the classroom, and have a desire to teach that is sometimes not matched by their tenure track colleagues.

As someone hoping for a TT position, I’m good with this.

I actually don’t know any adjuncts who actually want to be adjuncts. They’re choosing it because it’s their only real option in academia.

(My bias is that most of my friends are humanities and social science PhDs… I assume there are adjuncts in other fields, or even in these fields that I don’t know, that are perfectly fine with being adjuncts.)

There are a few community college adjuncts doing it as a part time hobby after retiring from their main job. They are rare and not the main issue of this discussion.

I’ve been an adjunct for most of the last 20 years and have no desire for a tenure-track position. I would love to have a lectureship for a few years, though. In my case, adjuncting is neither a hobby nor a choice made because it is my only real option in academia. It is a part-time job that has allowed me to be home with my children a great deal and still provided us with enough additional income to fund our lives.