Academic job - need negotiation advice

[AnyoneGotCoffeePlease]

Sorry everyone - crossposting for traffic

Right, I have never had to negotiate a contract in an academic setting (mostly because the job market is what it is).

I have two offers:

Offer #1: Full-Time, Permanent, 3.5h from where we live now. DH couldn't move so I'd have to stay away during the week. Mostly online teaching. In theory, I could work remotely for some days of the week but contract currently says I am expected to be in 5 days per week

Offer #2: 6-months fixed-term, Full-Time, local. Said they'd try to get at least two of the five(!) 6-months contracts they are hiring moved to permanent. I am confident enough to know thar IF they get the funding, I would get the permanent position but would have to wait for the new finance year to find out. Slightly more prestige - I personally do not give a damn about that but future employers might. Could see myself work here for a very long time, Option#1 would be a stepping-stone due to distance.

Do you think there is any point in me contacting both unis and tell them about the other offer to see if either Option 1 would write at least 2 days remote work into the contract, or Option 2 offers to extend the contract length (1+ year)?

I would - obviously - try to phrase it a little more subtle (advice on this, too, appreciated!) but I'm not sure whether it could harm my long-term prospects?

Without the funding the university's hands will be tied re the 6 month contract.
You could suggest wfh to the other one. But again their hands may be tied.
Working away from home can be miserable. I'd go for the 6 month one

I think you need to go back to each and say you have another attractive offer on the table and tell them what you would need for their offer to be the right one for you and see what they can do.

That said, I would also go with your gut and look long term. Personally, I would probably go for 2, without too much consideration of 1.

It seems an unusual situation for an academic job to demand you are in the office 5 days a week (unless you are teaching that much?). I have a similar commute (3 hours door to door). I do 3 days a week in the office usually and 1 day wfh. I’m compressed hours so that’s my full time work week. I know no one who is in the office every day, most work from home 1-2 days a week at least.

I do that commute up and back in one day and that works well for me. I have 2 dc and I try to be home for bath and bedtime. But I wouldn’t do it for a job I didn’t really love.

A permanent contract in somewhere who don’t want to stay is only worth so much, I think. It’s a good precedent, but if you don’t want to be there permanently, well, it’s a lot of effort for not really the right position.

My university is where I’d like to build my career. I started on an 18 month contract. Things have fallen into place and I have quite a bit of job security now. It’s been worth the initial precariousness.

So I would personally go for job 2. If you’ve gotten 2 offers now, even if that doesn’t work out, there will be something more around the bend. It’s worth the risk for the chance at a longer term contract somewhere you’d really like to be.

Apologies for not replying sooner, things have been a little crazy with the strikes! Thank you both for your input!

My gut feeling is to go with Option #2 but Option #1 actually just invited me to visit again, etc. I had asked by when they need a decision because I was considering two offers. Option #2 is on strike, so difficult to get any info from them (#1 didn't meet the threshold).

I get the feeling #1 invited me to see what they could offer me in order to entice me to choose them. They didn't leave a good impression - not a bad impression either but there are a few red flags that make me think the institutional level might not be very organised.

I have been in precarious work for so long (currently part-time with four unis!), I was beginning to think full-time, not to mention permanent, would never happen. I admit, though, that the permanent contract is the only thing that I really like about Option #1.

@mindutopia It would be 3h one way, so even with compressed hours, a daily commute would be pretty rough. They didn't say 'be in' 5 days per week but as the contract currently stands, I couldn't say no if they schedule meetings Mon, Wed, Fri if that makes sense. Given the recent invite, I think I could change that, though.

I think I'll use the invite to buy me some time and try to talk to Option #2 after the strike is over. Wish me luck!

I’d go for offer 2. Working away from home more than 2 nights a week is tough and gets old very quickly.

Given what you have said about offer 2, even if they don’t get full time, permanent funding, it sounds like it would look better on your CV and good be stepping to stone to another job that is better than offer 1.

If you are tied to your current area, I suspect a foot in the door with the local one may be more useful. If you take option #1, it might be permanent, but you're probably always going to be looking for something nearer home. It would be permanent in that there would be no risk of unemployment, but not in the sense of not needing to look for another job.

I do think I will 'risk it' and accept the offer from Option #2 - but any negotiating advice would be appreciated!

I do think that it’s easier to negotiate a permanent job when you already have one. Your chances of getting a permanent position in your preferred uni are probably better if you have permanent position in another uni than a temporary position there. Its a gamble either way though!

If my main objective were career advancement, I’d definitely take the permanent position. Casualisation is increasing (unless the impact of the strike is greater than it appears it will be) and it’s not an easy way to live. However, you have to balance career with how you think you’d manage with the commute / living in two places. Personally, I would def have gone for the permanent post earlier in my career but now I don’t know as I’m more settled.