It's illegal for colleges and universities to pressure us--but why hasn't the pandemic sparked conversations about what would make retirement attractive and clear the way for younger faculty?
fantsstic thiughtful piece. I particularly underline the need to open up jobs to younger PH.Ds - the academy is skewed too old, and the stark inequality of a half starved adjunct work force waiting for positions to be posted is something professors —professing to be concerned with justice — need to focus on.
Like your suggestions for helping people transition. I retired relatively early (64) due to toxic dean and department. I was tired of being part of the PPOWs (permanently pissed off women). "Institution - free", I still conduct research and evaluation, write for publication, and present at conferences (costs are now consultant business expenses). Miss the teachable moments in the classroom. Don't miss the corporatization of academia.
Great suggestions Claire--esp. RE travel (office space would also go far, as many emerita have no room at home for all their books). I will say, however, that academics work on a different clock than most professionals. It would be far better to ask people to retire after a certain number of years in employment with benefits. Many of us may not have had deferred income--social security or a retirement/pension fund--until our 30s, and thus have "banked" 5-10 years less of a retirement fund than our professional peers. So, rather than an arbitrary age, why not say "after 45 years on the tenure track"....
When I decided to retire, I found the responses completely gendered. Women said, "Do it, you'll love it" and men said "Don't, retirement is death." For many of them, I think it was, as their job was their life. But most women have more strings to their bow. I'm a poster child for retirement -- I was able to write a new book, which I couldn't have done under CUNY's course load. Bonnie Anderson
Good piece, Clare. As you indicate, “senior” faculty vary a lot; but i suspect that finances are a big worry for many. I have heard that Columbia faculty tend to retire at much older age than other universities because we live in rentals and have no equity in homes. (Yes, our privilege includes staying in our apartments, but the rent continues to go up...). I myself cannot imagine going to school for another degree; but I am tired both physically and mentally from the stress of institutional BS. I have my plan—I’m out soon! But have projects that I will continue to pursue.
As a retired historian (at 68) I say brava to this piece. Like my friend Susan Reverby (we were in grad school in the 80s) I like to say I am repurposed not retired. I do regret that my line disappeared and that I didn’t open up a job for one of the wonderful scholars out there seeking a full time position
The problem at the entry point is not I think a consequence (mostly) of people working too long--that concedes far too much to the people who have choked the entry point to death. Nobody should accept the proposition that some group of people should just go to the Soylent Green factory so that their fixed, constrained places can be taken by another group of people who will be Logan's Runned to death in short order. That said, we have almost no vision of what a creative, constructive, generative last third of a career could look like for faculty who are not book factories or who do not move into administrative leadership. My colleagues and I at the Aydelotte Foundation at Swarthmore are profoundly convinced that one thing we're completely squandering is the deep knowledge that long-serving faculty have about how their institutions work. Why anyone hires the standard consultants who have little to no direct experience with higher education over potentially turning to long-serving faculty who know a great deal about it is either a mystery or it's perfectly explicable (e.g., those who hire consultants aren't actually hiring knowledgeable experts on purpose).
Note here that at its inception, Brandeis University saw the forced retirement at Harvard and other schools as an opportunity to recruit some great profs.
fantsstic thiughtful piece. I particularly underline the need to open up jobs to younger PH.Ds - the academy is skewed too old, and the stark inequality of a half starved adjunct work force waiting for positions to be posted is something professors —professing to be concerned with justice — need to focus on.
Like your suggestions for helping people transition. I retired relatively early (64) due to toxic dean and department. I was tired of being part of the PPOWs (permanently pissed off women). "Institution - free", I still conduct research and evaluation, write for publication, and present at conferences (costs are now consultant business expenses). Miss the teachable moments in the classroom. Don't miss the corporatization of academia.
Great suggestions Claire--esp. RE travel (office space would also go far, as many emerita have no room at home for all their books). I will say, however, that academics work on a different clock than most professionals. It would be far better to ask people to retire after a certain number of years in employment with benefits. Many of us may not have had deferred income--social security or a retirement/pension fund--until our 30s, and thus have "banked" 5-10 years less of a retirement fund than our professional peers. So, rather than an arbitrary age, why not say "after 45 years on the tenure track"....
When I decided to retire, I found the responses completely gendered. Women said, "Do it, you'll love it" and men said "Don't, retirement is death." For many of them, I think it was, as their job was their life. But most women have more strings to their bow. I'm a poster child for retirement -- I was able to write a new book, which I couldn't have done under CUNY's course load. Bonnie Anderson
Good piece, Clare. As you indicate, “senior” faculty vary a lot; but i suspect that finances are a big worry for many. I have heard that Columbia faculty tend to retire at much older age than other universities because we live in rentals and have no equity in homes. (Yes, our privilege includes staying in our apartments, but the rent continues to go up...). I myself cannot imagine going to school for another degree; but I am tired both physically and mentally from the stress of institutional BS. I have my plan—I’m out soon! But have projects that I will continue to pursue.
As a retired historian (at 68) I say brava to this piece. Like my friend Susan Reverby (we were in grad school in the 80s) I like to say I am repurposed not retired. I do regret that my line disappeared and that I didn’t open up a job for one of the wonderful scholars out there seeking a full time position
The problem at the entry point is not I think a consequence (mostly) of people working too long--that concedes far too much to the people who have choked the entry point to death. Nobody should accept the proposition that some group of people should just go to the Soylent Green factory so that their fixed, constrained places can be taken by another group of people who will be Logan's Runned to death in short order. That said, we have almost no vision of what a creative, constructive, generative last third of a career could look like for faculty who are not book factories or who do not move into administrative leadership. My colleagues and I at the Aydelotte Foundation at Swarthmore are profoundly convinced that one thing we're completely squandering is the deep knowledge that long-serving faculty have about how their institutions work. Why anyone hires the standard consultants who have little to no direct experience with higher education over potentially turning to long-serving faculty who know a great deal about it is either a mystery or it's perfectly explicable (e.g., those who hire consultants aren't actually hiring knowledgeable experts on purpose).
Note here that at its inception, Brandeis University saw the forced retirement at Harvard and other schools as an opportunity to recruit some great profs.