Current literature relating to academic employment suggests the academy is approaching a crossroads. There is evidence that the academy is reaching a period where a significant portion of staff intend to leave the profession within the next five years, which would seem to make way for new entrants into the workforce. However, casualisation of the academic workforce has steadily increased over the last two decades, resulting in fewer permanent academic staff positions. Sparked in part by long-term funding cuts occurring, despite student numbers increasing, and then the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (Heffernan, 2022); a scenario has formed where a growth in casual labour practices is the norm (Crimmins, 2017). These academics are widely known as being precariously employed and may be known as ‘sessionals/teaching assistants’ (for teaching-related work) or ‘research assistants/fellows’ (for research-related work) and can be employed on contracts, sometimes ranging from hours through to fixed-term contracts that can extend from months to years. For the purposes of this paper, the term ‘precarious’ is used to include all academics employed on short-term and casual contracts (Mula et al., 2022). Similar to ‘tenured academics’ in the United States, some Australian academics have ‘continuing’ employment, while academics in Canada, Europe, and the United Kingdome have ‘permanent’ roles which denotes a degree of security and permanency to their positions. For the purposes of this paper, the term ‘permanent’ is used for academics in these roles.

Varying rates of casualisation exist with reports of between 16 to over 70 per cent of the academic workforce now engaged in casual employment or short-term contracts (Byers & Tani, 2014; Crimmins, 2017). While countries such as Canada and Finland have had a less pronounced oversupply of qualified candidates, the massification of doctoral programs means that the number of PhD holders seeking academic employment now outstrips available academic jobs in many countries (Heffernan, 2022). While figures differ between countries, institutional type (research vs teaching focused), and disciplinary areas, but in a majority of cases, the trend is that casual employment has increased at a time when the market continues to be flooded with graduates seeking academic employment (Heffernan, 2019). 

One might have expected that academics leaving the profession due to retirement or other professional opportunities would have made way for sessional employees to gain permanent positions; but this has not proven to be the case. Instead, staff with permanent positions leaving the academy have been replaced by cheaper-to-employ workers on contract (Heffernan, 2020; Ryan et al., 2013). The COVID-19 pandemic has had further repercussions for the higher education sector. Although COVID’s impact differs between countries, institutions, and faculties, overall, the pandemic has driven universities into times of austerity. Blackmore (2020) highlights that though these levels of austerity are institution dependent, any form of financial downturn is often met with hiring practices that shift resources to cheaper forms of employment such as casual and contract staff. It has also been noted that COVID has not significantly altered the higher education employment landscape; but has exacerbated already existing trends for replacing continuing staff members with casual/contract workers; diminishing permanent positions, and increasing competition for permanent employment (Doidige & Doyle, 2020). 

Institutional ethical approval was gained before the data generation process began via an online survey which was initially promoted through the researchers’ personal and professional networks, before snowball sampling and social media resulted in 109 participants from Australia, North America, and the United Kingdom. These locations were selected for analysis as they are often compared in higher education analysis due to their shared work environments for academics, and are areas of common academic migration (Teichler, 2015; Tremblay et al. 2014). Location data is provided as supplementary information as the key purpose of the paper is to examine the thought processes and understanding of individual academics, and to highlight the human element and personal consequences of academic networks. This is important because while factors such as publication track-records are often cited as key factors, networks are rarely discussed in the large-scale quantitative studies of academic employment. The survey included 20 questions with 7 short-answer questions relating to the participants’ demographics, and the final 13 being mid-length answer questions (up to 300 words) about participants’ experiences with employment and the academic job market. It is acknowledged that there are limitations associated with open-ended survey questions, such as participants’ misunderstanding the question, or attempts to interpret the subtext of the researcher’s questions. The generation and analysis of the data was therefore guided by Punch’s (2013) argument that open-ended questions remain one of the most effective methods of sourcing data relating to lived experiences, and that issues relating to open-ended questions can be avoided if the questions relate to specific aspects of a topic as they did in this study. The researchers were additionally aware of other known issues relating to data generated from online surveys such as low response rates and the potential of only attracting a particular participant demographic. However, this method was selected because recruitment via social media can achieve a number and diversity of participants that would not be achievable without substantial funds and research time (Kosinski et al., 2015); a scenario evident in this study as recruitment via social media gained participants from several countries and generated over 82,000 words of raw data. Data were analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) method of thematic analysis. This method was chosen as when working with qualitative data, thematic analysis provides a system by which to identify patterns in the responses relating to participants’ experiences and perspectives (Clarke & Braun, 2017).

Perhaps of most importance, the re-evaluation of university hiring practices needs to continue. Bourdieu (1977) knew decades ago that meritocracy in the university was a myth, but this belief persists despite the university taking on more business-like approaches (Heffernan, 2020). This area of investigation is more important now than ever before because the clearer the function and landscape of the university becomes, the better understanding of the institution those operating within it will possess which will allow them to make more informed decisions about their career intensions. Second, selection committees must be more conscious of network activity and advantages. As was made clear in the literature and via participant statements, applicants in strictly merit-based employment rounds maybe judged solely on their achievements, but it is crucial to be aware that individual achievements can originate from network activity. These achievements may not always be clear, but when they are, they must be considered. Finally, it must also be accepted that network connections are a strategy for career establishment and progression. The importance of networks and networking must be more clearly established for both existing and hopeful academics. Providing those operating within institutions with more transparent understandings about the rules of the academic employment game, and allow them to make more informed decisions. A majority of participants spoke of entrepreneurial academics, who already possessed significant capital, and who used this capital to successfully pursue networks and network opportunities, to acquire even more capital and career success.

Blackmore, J. (2020). The carelessness of entrepreneurial universities in a world risk society: a feminist reflection on the impact of Covid-19 in Australia. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(7), 1332-1336. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1825348 Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1977). Reproduction in society, education and culture (R. Nice, Trans.). Sage. Byers, P., & Tani, M. (2014). Engaging or training sessional staff. Australian Universities’ Review, 56(1), 13-21. Clarke, V., & Braun, V., (2017). Thematic analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 297-298. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613 Crimmins, G., Oprescu, F., & Nash, G. (2017). Three pathways to support the professional and career development of casual academics. International Journal for Academic Development, 22(2), 144-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2016.1263962 Doidige, S. & Doyle, J. (2020). Australian universities in the age of Covid. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1804343 Heffernan, T. (2020) There’s No Career in Academia Without Networks’: Academic Networks and Career Trajectory. Higher Education Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1799948 Heffernan, T. (2022). Bourdieu and Higher Education: Life in the Modern University. Springer. Heffernan, T. & Heffernan, A. (2019). The Academic Exodus: The Role of Institutional Support in Academics Leaving Universities and the Academy. Professional Development in Education, 45(1), 102-113. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2018.1474491 Kosinski, M., Matz, S., Gosling, S., Popov, V., & Stillwell, D. (2015). Facebook as a research tool for the social sciences: Opportunities, challenges, ethical considerations, and practical guidelines. American Psychologist, 70(6), 543-556. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039210 Mula, J., Rodriquez, C., Segovia, J., & Cruz0Gonzalez, C. (2022). Early career researchers' identity: A qualitative review. Higher Education Quarterly, 76(4), 786-799. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12348 Punch, K. (2013). Introduction to Social Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. SAGE. Ryan, S., Burgess, J., Connell, J., & Groen, E. (2013). Casual Academic Staff in an Australian University: Marginalised and excluded. Tertiary Education and Management, 19(2), 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2013.783617 Teichler, U. (2015). Academic Mobility and Migration: What We Know and What We Do Not Know. European Review, 23(1), 6-37. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1062798714000787 Tremblay, R., Hardwick, S., & O’Neill, J. (2014). Academic Migration at the Canada–US Border, American Review of Canadian Studies, 44(1), 118-134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02722011.2014.885541