Indeed, a slower, but still stable and respected, career path within the academy would greatly help the working parents who are trying to juggle their family responsibilities with the pressures of sustaining their research, prepping new courses, and participating in the academic community. But the widespread availability and acceptance of permanent, part-time positions would also benefit those scholars who had left the fold and needed a little time to come back up to speed. Others, whose nonacademic work permitted it, could continue to keep one foot in each camp and combine academic and nonacademic employment into one full-time job. Admittedly, this proposal might only benefit the most privileged applicants, who can afford to live on a part-time salary. This problem was brought forcefully to my attention this year, as I surveyed the guidelines for postdoctoral fellowships.
Some competitions require that applicants hold Ph.D.'s less than four years old.
I received my Ph.D. in 1994, and I am now out of the running for those postdocs, despite never having held a full-time academic job. Not only does this make it hard on candidates trying to re-enter the academy, it also defeats the goal of supporting scholars who are just starting their careers. Or perhaps the selection should give preferential treatment to those scholars working on the margins from outside the profession. At the very least, these competitions should not discriminate against people who started their academic careers more slowly, for whatever reason. Needless to say, this prejudice does not reflect the realities of the current job market, and should be censured by professional organizations.