For pdf version of letter and attachments see here. For many other UK cases involving AUT/UCU/NAFTHE inaction see the extensive Bullied Academics blog
From: http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/07/letter-to-sally-hunt-moran-blumsohn.html
Saturday, July 5, 2008
A letter to Sally Hunt (Moran, Blumsohn)
Sally Hunt is currently General Secretary of the University and College Union (UCU), and the last General Secretary of the Association of University Teachers (UK) prior to its merger with NATFHE to form the UCU. The below letter from Rhetta Moran and myself is self explanatory. See also this and this for some background.
For pdf version of letter and attachments see here. For many other UK cases involving AUT/UCU/NAFTHE inaction see the extensive Bullied Academics blog
From: http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/07/letter-to-sally-hunt-moran-blumsohn.html
For pdf version of letter and attachments see here. For many other UK cases involving AUT/UCU/NAFTHE inaction see the extensive Bullied Academics blog
From: http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/07/letter-to-sally-hunt-moran-blumsohn.html
Rhetta Moran, David Healy - and the language of academic bullying
My friend Rhetta Moran was fired from Salford University (a "greater" Manchester University) in 2005 under very unusual circumstances.
There are fascinating linguistic aspects of sham university procedures and integrity scandals. Rhetta's research was said to be "no longer compatible with the school".
A key problem facing academia in the UK is the lack of any plausible institution that speaks up for integrity and the values of a university. As Rhetta states, "One would have though that the idea of "compatible" or "incompatible" research would be something that should interest an academic union".
This brief summary of Rhetta's story serves as a prelude to my next post about a joint letter we wrote to Sally Hunt about the dismal integrity failures of the Association of University Teachers (AUT). Hunt is currently General Secretary of the University and College Union (UCU), and the last General Secretary of the AUT the merger with NATFHE to form the UCU.
The idea of "incompatible" research formed a key part of the scandalous firing of Professor David Healy at the University of Toronto. Following a lecture during which Healy expressed concerns about the integrity of pharmaceutical research, Dr. David Goldbloom fired him, stating that : "We believe that it is not a good fit between you and the role as leader of an academic program in mood and anxiety disorders at the Centre and in relation to the University. This view was solidified by your recent appearance at the Centre in the context of an academic lecture. While you are held in high regard as a scholar of the history of modem psychiatry, we do not feel your approach is compatible with the goals for development of the academic and clinical resource that we have."
In contrast to supine academic unions in the UK, some other academic unions (most notably the Canadian Association of University Teachers) have acted vigorously to defend many academics confronted by important assaults on integrity.
I will let Rhetta introduce herself:
From: http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/07/rhetta-moran-david-healy-and-language.html
There are fascinating linguistic aspects of sham university procedures and integrity scandals. Rhetta's research was said to be "no longer compatible with the school".
A key problem facing academia in the UK is the lack of any plausible institution that speaks up for integrity and the values of a university. As Rhetta states, "One would have though that the idea of "compatible" or "incompatible" research would be something that should interest an academic union".
This brief summary of Rhetta's story serves as a prelude to my next post about a joint letter we wrote to Sally Hunt about the dismal integrity failures of the Association of University Teachers (AUT). Hunt is currently General Secretary of the University and College Union (UCU), and the last General Secretary of the AUT the merger with NATFHE to form the UCU.
The idea of "incompatible" research formed a key part of the scandalous firing of Professor David Healy at the University of Toronto. Following a lecture during which Healy expressed concerns about the integrity of pharmaceutical research, Dr. David Goldbloom fired him, stating that : "We believe that it is not a good fit between you and the role as leader of an academic program in mood and anxiety disorders at the Centre and in relation to the University. This view was solidified by your recent appearance at the Centre in the context of an academic lecture. While you are held in high regard as a scholar of the history of modem psychiatry, we do not feel your approach is compatible with the goals for development of the academic and clinical resource that we have."
In contrast to supine academic unions in the UK, some other academic unions (most notably the Canadian Association of University Teachers) have acted vigorously to defend many academics confronted by important assaults on integrity.
I will let Rhetta introduce herself:
Dr Rhetta Moran, 1 July 2008
I was dismissed by the University of Salford under unusual circumstances in 2005 following a previously successful academic career. During the previous year, I had been the lead investigator in a publicly funded project (Salford RAPAR SRB5) which was designed to collate accurate information about housing, health, employment, economic, personal safety and education problems involving people seeking asylum. The project was funded through the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Clearly this was a contentious project.
No factually plausible reasons for my dismissal as an academic under such circumstances have ever been provided. Employers appear to exercise the right to dismiss staff on the most thinly constructed grounds, or even no grounds at all, such as unspecified research "incompatibility". The university returned all grant funds including a newly obtained one (£192,316) from the European Social Fund.
I have learned that legal structures designed to deal with employment disputes have almost no relevance to academic integrity. Neither, unfortunately, did the Association of University Teachers (AUT).
We now know that the PCT Chief Executive, Mike Burrows, wrote to my "boss" Professor Michael Harloe and told him I was being removed from leadership of the research in April 2004. This was very shortly after a newspaper article appeared in the Observer. In this article (March 28, 2004) the Observer described how young asylum-seeking women were having to go underground in Salford. Drawing on work and contacts provided by myself, it cited me as follows:
This lack of "compatibility" was never explained.
One would have though that the idea of "compatible" or "incompatible" research would be something that should interest an academic union. The AUT attempted to induce to me to go along with a sham process as well as a gag agreement while ignoring every principle involved. Their silence has been deafening.
The university then stated that the reason for my dismissal was because I was "redundant" - a truly marvellous tautology.
I was finally sacked in January 2005, the day before the Deputy Prime Minister announced the opening of the Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company, in which my former boss Vice Chancellor, Michael Harloe has major involvement.
It is not clear whether any "incompatibility" might be down to fear of research or academic discussion that a City Council or conflicted academic leadership would find uncomfortable. It would be good to know.
I was dismissed by the University of Salford under unusual circumstances in 2005 following a previously successful academic career. During the previous year, I had been the lead investigator in a publicly funded project (Salford RAPAR SRB5) which was designed to collate accurate information about housing, health, employment, economic, personal safety and education problems involving people seeking asylum. The project was funded through the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Clearly this was a contentious project.
No factually plausible reasons for my dismissal as an academic under such circumstances have ever been provided. Employers appear to exercise the right to dismiss staff on the most thinly constructed grounds, or even no grounds at all, such as unspecified research "incompatibility". The university returned all grant funds including a newly obtained one (£192,316) from the European Social Fund.
I have learned that legal structures designed to deal with employment disputes have almost no relevance to academic integrity. Neither, unfortunately, did the Association of University Teachers (AUT).
We now know that the PCT Chief Executive, Mike Burrows, wrote to my "boss" Professor Michael Harloe and told him I was being removed from leadership of the research in April 2004. This was very shortly after a newspaper article appeared in the Observer. In this article (March 28, 2004) the Observer described how young asylum-seeking women were having to go underground in Salford. Drawing on work and contacts provided by myself, it cited me as follows:
People have been dumped in Salford, but without resources,' says Dr Rhetta Moran, a senior research fellow at the Revans Institute with overall responsibility for the Salford RAPAR project. 'There was no additional support for local practitioners. There is not one immigration solicitor in the whole city. And it leads to bitterness because this is a place where locals have been making their own demands on the council for years.Other staff employed on the project were threatened with immediate suspension for gross misconduct if they had anything to do with me. It appears that there was an attempt to induce staff to accuse me of bullying, but they declined to do so. The following month I received a letter of dismissal John Dobson, who advised that my research was no longer "compatible" with the school. Dobson as it happens is also the current President of Salford University UCU.
This lack of "compatibility" was never explained.
One would have though that the idea of "compatible" or "incompatible" research would be something that should interest an academic union. The AUT attempted to induce to me to go along with a sham process as well as a gag agreement while ignoring every principle involved. Their silence has been deafening.
The university then stated that the reason for my dismissal was because I was "redundant" - a truly marvellous tautology.
I was finally sacked in January 2005, the day before the Deputy Prime Minister announced the opening of the Central Salford Urban Regeneration Company, in which my former boss Vice Chancellor, Michael Harloe has major involvement.
It is not clear whether any "incompatibility" might be down to fear of research or academic discussion that a City Council or conflicted academic leadership would find uncomfortable. It would be good to know.
From: http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/07/rhetta-moran-david-healy-and-language.html
Friday, July 4, 2008
Academic to be disciplined for offering extra lessons
An academic is facing disciplinary action for giving his students extra tuition in his spare time. Bernard H Casey ran the refresher session to give undergraduates additional help at the end of an economics course. But now he has been warned by Birkbeck, University of London, that the extra lessons broke university rules - and may have had a "detrimental impact" on students.
Dr Casey, an economics lecturer, has been summoned to an official disciplinary hearing where he faces an official reprimand. Bernard H Casey ran the refresher session to give undergraduates additional help at the end of an economics course.
Dr Casey, an economics lecturer, has been summoned to an official disciplinary hearing where he faces an official reprimand. Fellow academics branded the action "ludicrous" and said universities were becoming bogged down in bureaucracy.
The row erupted when senior staff at Birkbeck decided to cut Dr Casey's course in quantitative economic methods from 24 to 22 weeks.
He decided to offer students an extra session at the end of the course to go over any outstanding questions - and asked officials at Birkbeck for room for up to two hours. But he was told by a senior manager that he must stick to the designated 22 sessions allocated for the module.
Dr Casey told Times Higher Education magazine: "The reply was 'no'. I talked to the students and said, look, this is a bit silly, but let's hold a session anyway. A colleague arranged a room, and we went along and did it."
But when officials at the university found out they launched an investigation. A series of emails passed between Dr Casey and senior staff reveal how he has now been ordered to attend a disciplinary hearing.
He was told: "The purpose of this meeting is to establish if your decision to hold a revision class was in violation of instruction from line management. In addition the investigation will consider the potential detrimental impact on the students taking the course."
Senior managers also demanded to know how many students took part and what costs were involved.
Dr Casey refused to name students at the "illegal" class. He insisted he had incurred travel costs "and purchased a cup of tea", but would not make an expenses claim. The decision to pursue disciplinary action is thought to have been motivated by his refusal to follow university rules.
Dr Casey, who actually works at another university and teaches part-time at Birkbeck, said: "The problem with Birkbeck is that it's stacking itself up with extraordinary amounts of admin staff and reducing teaching staff, but that's a standard story these days,"
Birkbeck refused to comment while disciplinary procedures continued. But other academics said the move underlined the extent to which lecturers were being undermined by bureaucracy.
UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: "Education professionals consistently top tables of the most unpaid overtime put in each year. The dedication of staff to their subject and their students, whilst often exploited, remains astonishing. We cannot build a world class education sector on the exploitation of staff, but to suggest we punish, rather than reward, those who continue to show such dedication is ludicrous."
From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk
Dr Casey, an economics lecturer, has been summoned to an official disciplinary hearing where he faces an official reprimand. Bernard H Casey ran the refresher session to give undergraduates additional help at the end of an economics course.
Dr Casey, an economics lecturer, has been summoned to an official disciplinary hearing where he faces an official reprimand. Fellow academics branded the action "ludicrous" and said universities were becoming bogged down in bureaucracy.
The row erupted when senior staff at Birkbeck decided to cut Dr Casey's course in quantitative economic methods from 24 to 22 weeks.
He decided to offer students an extra session at the end of the course to go over any outstanding questions - and asked officials at Birkbeck for room for up to two hours. But he was told by a senior manager that he must stick to the designated 22 sessions allocated for the module.
Dr Casey told Times Higher Education magazine: "The reply was 'no'. I talked to the students and said, look, this is a bit silly, but let's hold a session anyway. A colleague arranged a room, and we went along and did it."
But when officials at the university found out they launched an investigation. A series of emails passed between Dr Casey and senior staff reveal how he has now been ordered to attend a disciplinary hearing.
He was told: "The purpose of this meeting is to establish if your decision to hold a revision class was in violation of instruction from line management. In addition the investigation will consider the potential detrimental impact on the students taking the course."
Senior managers also demanded to know how many students took part and what costs were involved.
Dr Casey refused to name students at the "illegal" class. He insisted he had incurred travel costs "and purchased a cup of tea", but would not make an expenses claim. The decision to pursue disciplinary action is thought to have been motivated by his refusal to follow university rules.
Dr Casey, who actually works at another university and teaches part-time at Birkbeck, said: "The problem with Birkbeck is that it's stacking itself up with extraordinary amounts of admin staff and reducing teaching staff, but that's a standard story these days,"
Birkbeck refused to comment while disciplinary procedures continued. But other academics said the move underlined the extent to which lecturers were being undermined by bureaucracy.
UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: "Education professionals consistently top tables of the most unpaid overtime put in each year. The dedication of staff to their subject and their students, whilst often exploited, remains astonishing. We cannot build a world class education sector on the exploitation of staff, but to suggest we punish, rather than reward, those who continue to show such dedication is ludicrous."
From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk
Thursday, July 3, 2008
What goes around will come around eventually...
Anonymous said:
I believe that these psychopaths do not so much create clones as end up with only those who admire them or can stomach working for them.
I was a manager in a department where somehow, though a lot of movement in the organisation, we ended up with a number of senior managers who all knew each other from way back when and who all had the same nasty temperament.
I kept a low profile and they must have thought I was going along fine because I was called into my managers' office one day and told that he had two jobs for me. The first was to increase the workload on part time working women to get them to either quit or accept a permanent full-time position, the second was to regularly change the schedule of a specific worker with mental illness and then to document "evidence of his incompetence" so that he could be dismissed by these managers who felt uncomfortable working with him. They knew that this man did not deal well with changes to his routine and that this could possibly lead to him having another breakdown, but they did not care. He was a good, quiet worker, who did his job well and I had no problems with him.
When I made it clear to them that I would resist any attempts by them to unlawfully dismiss this person I became an outcast myself and was mercilessly bullied. I simply refused to quit or move on (sheer bloody stubbornness at their cheek to try and ruin my career) until I came back from annual leave one day to find I'd been moved to a new department during my absence under the guise of it being a "development opportunity". I'd mentioned once, somewhere in an appraisal, that I would like to spend some time in that department and this was used as a reason for moving me from my role into a secondment in a junior role. My salary was the same and although I resented it I decided to take advantage of the opportunity offered and excelled in my new role, was offered a permanent position in the new department and now, 4 years later, I am doing very well thank you, while that lot have all left for one reason or another.
If your organisation is not totally rotten what goes around will come around eventually.
I believe that these psychopaths do not so much create clones as end up with only those who admire them or can stomach working for them.
I was a manager in a department where somehow, though a lot of movement in the organisation, we ended up with a number of senior managers who all knew each other from way back when and who all had the same nasty temperament.
I kept a low profile and they must have thought I was going along fine because I was called into my managers' office one day and told that he had two jobs for me. The first was to increase the workload on part time working women to get them to either quit or accept a permanent full-time position, the second was to regularly change the schedule of a specific worker with mental illness and then to document "evidence of his incompetence" so that he could be dismissed by these managers who felt uncomfortable working with him. They knew that this man did not deal well with changes to his routine and that this could possibly lead to him having another breakdown, but they did not care. He was a good, quiet worker, who did his job well and I had no problems with him.
When I made it clear to them that I would resist any attempts by them to unlawfully dismiss this person I became an outcast myself and was mercilessly bullied. I simply refused to quit or move on (sheer bloody stubbornness at their cheek to try and ruin my career) until I came back from annual leave one day to find I'd been moved to a new department during my absence under the guise of it being a "development opportunity". I'd mentioned once, somewhere in an appraisal, that I would like to spend some time in that department and this was used as a reason for moving me from my role into a secondment in a junior role. My salary was the same and although I resented it I decided to take advantage of the opportunity offered and excelled in my new role, was offered a permanent position in the new department and now, 4 years later, I am doing very well thank you, while that lot have all left for one reason or another.
If your organisation is not totally rotten what goes around will come around eventually.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Columbia University awarded Divestors of People Standard
Columbia University awarded Divestors of People Standard.
-------------------
Academic bullying, or “mobbing,” is common at Columbia University — especially in the “pink collar” departments (e.g. social work, education). It’s impossible to fight because it’s completely a part of the culture here. The sad thing is that we lose the best doctoral students as a result because they see this nonsense for what it is. If they fight it, we get rid of them. Or, if they’re tired, they just leave.
It’s a crime of epic proportions and very few people are talking about it.
— Columbia Prof Jun 26, 11:55 AM
-------------------
Academic bullying, or “mobbing,” is common at Columbia University — especially in the “pink collar” departments (e.g. social work, education). It’s impossible to fight because it’s completely a part of the culture here.
This is a very perceptive observation (about the “pink collar” departments as places prone to a bullying culture). At Columbia the Madonna Constantine case is surely a classic example. This can spread to other parts of a campus via divisions of Student Affairs, which have their cultural origin in programs like social work and education. One only has to look at the controlling culture of Student Affairs programs (speech codes, behavior codes, thought control, emotional manipulation) to see that this has less to do with politics per se and everything to do with psychological bullying.
— Student Affairs Observer Jun 28, 10:58 PM
-------------------
At Columbia, a colleague reported the social work school to the Fed for grant fraud. She had four boxes of evidence.
Meanwhile, the wife of one of the adjuncts (who had some lowly clerical/clinical position) befriended this colleague. This “wife” reported everything she was told to the deans.
Long story short, this wife now has a faculty position and our colleague was raked over the coals (e.g. she had a sick family member and the school threatened her with eviction from Columbia housing).
Higher ed is one nasty business.
— Another Columbia Prof Jul 2, 11:25 AM
-------------------
Academic bullying, or “mobbing,” is common at Columbia University — especially in the “pink collar” departments (e.g. social work, education). It’s impossible to fight because it’s completely a part of the culture here. The sad thing is that we lose the best doctoral students as a result because they see this nonsense for what it is. If they fight it, we get rid of them. Or, if they’re tired, they just leave.
It’s a crime of epic proportions and very few people are talking about it.
— Columbia Prof Jun 26, 11:55 AM
-------------------
Academic bullying, or “mobbing,” is common at Columbia University — especially in the “pink collar” departments (e.g. social work, education). It’s impossible to fight because it’s completely a part of the culture here.
This is a very perceptive observation (about the “pink collar” departments as places prone to a bullying culture). At Columbia the Madonna Constantine case is surely a classic example. This can spread to other parts of a campus via divisions of Student Affairs, which have their cultural origin in programs like social work and education. One only has to look at the controlling culture of Student Affairs programs (speech codes, behavior codes, thought control, emotional manipulation) to see that this has less to do with politics per se and everything to do with psychological bullying.
— Student Affairs Observer Jun 28, 10:58 PM
-------------------
At Columbia, a colleague reported the social work school to the Fed for grant fraud. She had four boxes of evidence.
Meanwhile, the wife of one of the adjuncts (who had some lowly clerical/clinical position) befriended this colleague. This “wife” reported everything she was told to the deans.
Long story short, this wife now has a faculty position and our colleague was raked over the coals (e.g. she had a sick family member and the school threatened her with eviction from Columbia housing).
Higher ed is one nasty business.
— Another Columbia Prof Jul 2, 11:25 AM
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Bullying at Cambridge University
The University of Cambridge does have a written policy against bullying, but this policy is not implemented in practice. There is a widespread problem of bullying at Cambridge University that is hidden from public view. Any attempt to bring this issue into public awareness is met with stone-walling/silence.A Cambridge PhD student
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Hallelujah, hallelujah... hallelujah!!!
Lecturers at North East Wales Institute to ballot on strike action after management fails to act on bullying
press@ucu.org.uk|
Tel:020 7520 1032
Mobile: 07773 796 882
Fax:020 7278 9383
----------------
Well, you are a bit late UCU, but you are more than welcome. Now move on and deal with workplace bullying not just in the above HEI, but in all the others too. You will find that the above is not an isolated case.
26 June 2008
Lecturers at North East Wales Institute of Higher Education (NEWI) yesterday (25 June) agreed to ballot on possible strike action after the Institute's failure to tackle the bullying of staff. Members of the UCU branch in NEWI voted unanimously to ballot branch members on strike action and action short of a strike in connection with the Institute's failure to agree a resolution to a collective grievance over complaints about bullying.
The branch also unanimously passed a vote of no confidence in the professionalism of the Institute's Human Resource managers.
Eight complaints have been made in the past few months about bullying within a particular School at the Institute, but the Institute's authorities have failed to take action.
UCU lodged a collective grievance in January that was rejected by NEWI managers. UCU presented the findings of a health and safety survey in March that showed urgent action was needed in one School, where 5 out of 13 academics had been bullied.
Over the past five months, the union has repeatedly asked for an independent investigation into the allegations and has written to the Head of Human Resources, the chair of the Academic Common Interest Group, the Principal and the Chair of the Board of Governors.
UCU's head of employment rights, Roger Kline, is writing to the Institute to remind employers of their duty of care to staff including a duty to prevent bullying and harassment.
If UCU members vote for industrial action, it is likely to take place in September.
Wales UCU regional official Margaret Phelan said:
'Bullying is a major concern amongst staff in colleges and universities, and a cause of stress and illness. It is all too common and UCU is taking bullying very seriously, wherever it happens.'
Trevor Phillipspress@ucu.org.uk|
Tel:020 7520 1032
Mobile: 07773 796 882
Fax:020 7278 9383
----------------
Well, you are a bit late UCU, but you are more than welcome. Now move on and deal with workplace bullying not just in the above HEI, but in all the others too. You will find that the above is not an isolated case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)