Charles Mitchell also known as 'Charlie Farlie'...

One more incompetent bully, narcissist and vindictive academic manager… He invited the victim into his office, and in the presence of his own two flying monkeys, he shouted incoherent accusations at the victim without reason except to intimidate and humble the latter. Later, the two flying monkeys attributed all the shouting to the victim… Charlie Farlie set it up and made sure his own witnesses would cover him… The epitome of moral cowardice.

Cambridge v-c criticised as whistleblowing academic wins tribunal

A University of Cambridge “whistleblower” who raised concerns about bullying has won his case at an employment tribunal, with vice-chancellor Deborah Prentice among the senior leaders criticised over their handling of the matter.

The bulk of complaints raised by astrophysics professor Wyn Evans were upheld in a judgment released on 10 August.

The academic had claimed he was victimised after raising concerns about the treatment of female staff members within the university’s Institute of Astronomy (IOA).

His tribunal, held in Bury St Edmunds earlier this year, heard how the university had taken “almost two years” to dismiss a grievance later raised against Evans and two other professors by the former IOA director, Richard McMahon...

...It finds that leadership within the IOA and the university failed to consistently demonstrate how they reached the decisions they did throughout the dispute, asserting that “pre-determined outcomes appeared to have been rubber-stamped”.

A “pattern of ghost writing and HR making other people’s decisions for them” was found to be “standard practice” within the university’s HR department “given how often it happened in this case”.

The judgment called Cambridge’s handling of the matter “beset by repeated delay” and said the university had been unaware of the impact the “fitful” process had on all involved.

“Allegations against the claimant were accepted and subjected to a prolonged nearly two-year investigation by the university even though they contained scant particularisation, and no evidence to support them,” the judgment says.

“By contrast, a number of the claimant’s detailed concerns or complaints were dismissed out of hand without a proper process.”

...In response, Cambridge said in a statement that it acknowledged the judgment and was “carefully reviewing it”.

From: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/cambridge-v-c-criticised-whistleblowing-academic-wins-tribunal

Violence in doctoral education: uncaring/uncareful practices of supervisors, co-supervisors, professors, and institutional authorities

Abstract
This article argues that the absence of care during doctoral education in neoliberalised academia – which fosters market-driven values and metrics, such as individualism, comparison, and accountability – constitutes a form of violence. This violence consists of harmful acts or omissions that harm students and is manifested in the uncaring, careless practices of supervisors and co-supervisors, as well as professors and institutional authorities (SCPI). Thus, this study exposes how power imbalances and lack of support in some students-SCPI relationships are perpetuated in a neoliberal context. A qualitative phenomenological approach was used to understand individuals’ lived experiences. Empirical data were obtained through semi-structured interviews with eight doctoral students at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) regarding their relationships with SCPI. The information was subjected to inductive thematic analysis, revealing that, according to these students’ perceptions, the uncaring practices involved dehumanised treatment and hindering research, and the careless practices comprised forsaking and extractivism. The consequences of these practices affect both students' mental health and the development of their research. This highlights the urgent need to transform academia into a more caring and careful place.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14681366.2025.2463452#d1e699

'Professor' David Vaughan - BA Ceramics is now at Central Academy... Shit floats!

 ...and in charge of 'school improvement' - Don't laugh! The vanity of this man has no end... He single-handedly secured the non-future of the design college, using it to advance his professional ambitions. He was invisible, making decisions that negatively affected many academics' lives. If you dared to complain, he would suspend you without following proper procedures and then try to buy your silence with non-disclosure agreements. These days, he is a 'Trustee' at the Central Academy. Shit floats. https://www.rrca.org.uk/about-us/governance

'University of South Wales should commission an independent review into toxic culture allegations'

 
"A university can have policies, procedures and reporting systems and still have a cultural problem," writes columnist Dylan Jones Evans.

The recent Newyddion S4C report into allegations of a “toxic work culture and bullying” at the University of South Wales should concern anyone who cares about the future of Welsh higher education.

The report says that former staff members have raised serious concerns about the university's culture, and that the allegations have prompted calls for an inquiry. Those claims are, of course, allegations and must be treated as such, but the fact that these concerns have now entered the public domain means this can no longer be treated as a purely private employment matter.

Universities are not ordinary employers but publicly funded civic institutions. They shape students' lives, employ thousands of people, influence regional economies, and help define the moral and intellectual standards of public life in Wales.

When allegations are made about bullying, harassment, discrimination, or a culture in which people feel they have not been treated fairly, the issue is not only whether individual claims can be defended, but also whether the institution, its regulator, and the Welsh Government are prepared to examine whether the systems meant to protect staff are working as they should…

Following the broadcast, the university circulated an internal message to staff acknowledging the story and stating that it was “very difficult to hear and read the perspectives of former members of staff”. It said the university was “very sorry that individuals feel they have not been treated fairly”, condemned bullying, harassment and discrimination, and stated that allegations are taken seriously and thoroughly examined...

Not surprisingly, the university’s internal message states that it disagrees with the assertions but cannot comment on the details of the two former members of staff who spoke to S4C, due to ongoing legal action. Of course, the legal caution is understandable, and any institution facing contested claims will be advised not to concede points that may be relevant to proceedings.

But legal caution aside, a public body can still avoid prejudging individual cases while acknowledging that the experiences described by its staff are serious enough to warrant independent reflection. Indeed, the university goes on to list a range of internal mechanisms, including a new People Strategy, a Dignity at Work and Study Policy, expanded whistleblowing arrangements, equality charters, and a People and Culture Board.

None of these is irrelevant, but when allegations relate to workplace culture, the existence of such mechanisms does not prove they are effective, because culture is not measured by the number of policies an organisation can list but by its behaviour and by whether people believe the institution will listen to employees' concerns…

If there is nothing to hide, as USW’s senior management has claimed, then the university itself should have no objection to commissioning an independent review to determine whether this is a few people complaining about poor treatment or a wider “toxic work culture” within the university that must be changed.

When serious allegations are made about a public institution, the answer cannot simply be that procedures exist and that the public has a right to know whether those who have been let down by such procedures have been treated fairly.

Most importantly, it’s time for those staff who have given so much to higher education to finally be heard and for real action to be taken to address this issue. Certainly, those in positions of power should not look the other way when such serious allegations are made, as Wales is far better than that.

From: https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/education/university-south-wales-should-commission-34002639

Why Don't We Talk About Bullying in Higher Education?

...But let's be honest. Bullying exists across the sector. I've seen it in many guises over three decades in HE, and I see it now with increasing frequency in conversations with clients, colleagues and friends. Not as an occasional outlier, but as a pattern that becomes more visible when pressure rises, and people feel threatened... 

 ...workplace stress and bullying than men. My own experience and interactions over the years align with that... 

 ...Decision makers in the process tend to be risk-averse, which compounds the problem. The perceived need to have definitive evidence often results in the process simply failing the victim. I’ve seen relatively few cases where the evidence is water-tight - generally it’s a succession of low-level incidents sustained over long periods of time, every single moment not quite crossing ‘the line’ (who sets that line anyway?!)... 

 ...in pressured institutions, this dynamic can accelerate quickly. Territorial skirmishes turn into turf wars. Information is hoarded rather than shared. Colleagues who once collaborated become guarded and transactional. And if you're the person tasked with implementing difficult decisions or surfacing uncomfortable truths, you can become a convenient lightning rod for blame and negative attention. Working in this environment is exhausting. And it's isolating... 

 ...Document relentlessly. Dates, times, exact words, witnesses, context. Email yourself a contemporaneous note after each incident. This feels tedious and exhausting, but it's essential if things escalate. Memory isn't evidence; records are. And the very process of documenting all of this can be bizarrely liberating as the dawning realisation that you are not imagining things starts to sink in. 

 Find allies. Serious bullies rarely have just one target. Quietly and carefully, find out whether others have experienced similar behaviour. There's safety and credibility in numbers, and it shifts the narrative from ‘personality clash’ (i.e. victim blaming) to ‘pattern of behaviour.’ To be clear, this shouldn’t ever descend to gossip or character assassination in the corridor. Preserve your own integrity in this process. 

Get external support. Union rep, coach, therapist, trusted mentor or HR expert outside the institution. You need someone who isn't embedded in the politics and can help you think clearly. This external view is vital for helping you feel supported and empowered and for providing options you may not have been aware of. 

Know your formal options, even if you choose not to use them. Understand your institution's grievance process, dignity-at-work policy, and the thresholds. Check out the escalation routes thoroughly. · 

Recognise when leaving is the right choice. This absolutely is not defeat, and it is not ‘letting them win’. Sometimes the institution is too invested in protecting the bully, and the cost of staying outweighs the benefits. Protecting your health, career and reputation elsewhere can be the wisest move. Only you can know for sure if this is the route for you... 

Let's be frank about the power dynamics at play. 

Some bullies are protected because they bring in money. Research income, student recruitment, and commercial partnerships - these carry weight. An academic who generates millions in grants may be quietly deemed ‘too valuable to lose,’ regardless of how many staff they've driven out or damaged. 

Some are protected because they hold political capital. They sit on the right committees, have the ear of the Vice-Chancellor, or know where institutional bodies are buried. Challenging them risks destabilising delicate power structures. Some are protected because confronting them is simply too difficult.

Employment law feels risky, the process feels endless, and the evidence can seem flimsy. The bully is articulate, well-connected, and will fight back hard. It's easier to wait until retirement or hope the problem resolves. Spoiler alert – it won’t. And some institutions choose reputation management over genuine action. The priority becomes containing the story rather than addressing the behaviour. Confidentiality becomes a shield - not for the complainant, but for the institution. The result? Staff learn that raising concerns is futile. They leave, or they stay silent. The bully remains. And the cycle continues... 

 From: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-dont-we-talk-bullying-higher-education-jenny-jenkin-pvj2e

American University library staff detail culture of bullying by supervisors

Across the two years she has worked at the American University library, Sydney Henry has compiled a notebook of her experiences. The pages chronicle, she says, a years-long pattern of intimidation and belittlement by supervisors. 

Henry said she was left out of meetings and was told she was lucky her employers gave her a chance despite her youth. Henry, 23, is the library’s communication and event coordinator. 
When she was assigned work beyond her pay grade and started seeking a raise, Henry met with University Librarian Jeehyun Davis, a member of the Dean’s Council and Henry’s top supervisor. Davis told her she likely wouldn’t do anything going through the Staff Union or human resources, Henry said.  

Henry, a unionised employee, had already filed a pay grievance through AU’s Staff Union in February 2025. When her supervisors learned of this, the bullying increased, Henry said. 
Henry is not the only library employee to say she’s faced mistreatment specifically from Davis, nor is she the only one to report it with no actionable results. Davis declined to sit for an interview but said in an emailed statement she “cannot comment on individual personnel matters” and that she takes “any concerns about workplace culture seriously and supports the university’s established processes for reviewing and addressing them.” 

According to Henry, others have reported Davis to the University over the last two years. One of those staff members is Bella Goris, now an adjunct professor in the College of Arts and Sciences, who formerly worked in the Office of Inclusive Excellence and for budget and personnel in the library.

Goris said their experience working in the library was similar to Henry’s. They too said they were asked to do work beyond their job description and paygrade and were belittled and excluded once they started asking for a raise.  

In spring 2025, Goris said she filed a Title IX complaint against Davis for discrimination, but never heard back from the Office of Equity and Title IX. The Eagle has not seen documentation of the complaint because it was made verbally and in person at the office...

According to Elison, the system to report workplace bullying at AU isn’t responsive enough to address the scope of the issue. He said he’s seen staff become so disillusioned with the reporting process that they don't follow through.

“It’s not even worth the trauma of going and reporting it,” he said. “Sometimes you just need to leave.” 

Henry, who first filed a grievance with the union in February 2025, said she saw an increase in mistreatment and described the reporting process as exhausting.

When it comes to reporting workplace mistreatment, staff at AU generally have two options: going through AU human resources directly, or union-eligible employees can file a grievance through AU’s Staff Union, part of Service Employees International Union Local 500.

Employees can also file a Title IX complaint through the Equity and Title IX Office when they feel like they’re being discriminated against based on their sex or gender identity. Goris said she filed a Title IX complaint regarding her experiences in the library but never heard back from the office...

From: https://www.theeagleonline.com/article/2026/01/american-university-library-staff-detail-culture-of-bullying-by-supervisors

Professors call for overhaul of university governance - University of Luxembourg

Two University of Luxembourg professors are calling for the institution’s governance to be overhauled as it approaches its 25th anniversary, and with an audit to get underway in the coming weeks.

In an open letter published Saturday in the Luxemburger Wort, Luc Heuschling, a professor of constitutional law, and Benoît Majerus, a European history professor, described the university as hierarchical and not democratic enough.

The letter was published as the government is preparing an audit of the university’s governance structures.

The audit comes after persistent media reports of bullying and mismanagement within the institution – including by this newspaper – which began after masked protesters had handed out flyers to members of parliament last September, warning of an “alarming situation behind the scenes.

Heuschling and Majerus criticised the university’s response to the reports, saying it had attempted to discredit the testimonials, describing them as personal frustrations while also presenting the university as the victim.  

Complaints mechanisms within the university appear not to fulfil their role if members of staff feel no other recourse than turning to the press, they said.

From: https://www.luxtimes.lu/luxembourg/university-of-luxembourgs-professors-call-for-governance-overhaul-amid-bullying-claims/140217072.html

Some 2025 posts...

Academic bullying is hidden in plain sight

... And, above all, there is no mention of emails, emails, emails: hundreds, thousands of them, full of unnecessary or impossible jobs – emails telling you off for not doing said unnecessary or impossible jobs – emails undermining you in front of others – emails magnifying minor failures – or emails damning with faint or ambivalent praise. Those emails sent on Monday mornings, to upset you at the start of the week – emails sent on Friday afternoons, so you dwell on them all weekend. Emails, emails, emails incessantly scything to and fro above you, like a razor-sharp pendulum, looming closer and closer…


https://bulliedacademics.blogspot.com/2024/09/academic-bullying-is-hidden-in-plain.html

-------------

Workplace Bullying Among Higher Education Faculty: A Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature - Part 2
...The structural characteristics of higher education institutions make university settings susceptible to abuses of power that produce ongoing, and frequently escalating, perceptions of injustice... Faculty self-governance processes that include the nomination and election of a Chair from within a department create situations in which department leaders have limited management experience or training and have instead spent their careers in competitive isolation as they confront the challenges of publication, teaching, service, tenure, and promotion...

https://articlegateway.com/index.php/JHETP/article/view/4601

-------------

The Peter and Dilbert Principles applied to academe


…individuals can be placed in managerial positions for which they are not competent. Thus, Peter (1969) and Peter and Hull (2011) refer to the Peter Principle, which asserts that within a firm's hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his or her level of incompetence, an outcome of this process… 

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10101-020-00235-6

 -------------
The effects of long-term workplace bullying on academics
...Psychological and Emotional Effects: Workplace bullying can lead to increased stress, mental distress, sleep disturbances, fatigue, depression, anxiety, and even work-related suicide. Victims may experience a loss of self-esteem and feelings of isolation, powerlessness, confusion, and helplessness...

https://bulliedacademics.blogspot.com/2025/05/the-effects-of-long-term-workplace.html

 -------------
“My Core Is Cracked”—Bullying in Higher Education as a Traumatic Process
The higher prevalence in universities can be understood in terms of well-established institutional factors that predispose specific organizations to bullying and coalesce in HEIs. Large organizations, hierarchical organizations and public sector organizations are vulnerable to a higher prevalence of bullying...

https://bulliedacademics.blogspot.com/2025/06/my-core-is-crackedbullying-in-higher.html

 ------------
Academic bullies leave no trace.
Academic bullying has recently received much greater attention from stakeholders and decision-makers in the scientific community through news coverage, actions taken against culpable lab leaders, and serious corrective measures taken by large institutions. Though some reports claim higher rates of bullying in academic than in non-academic settings, one suspects there would have been an even larger gap between the two settings if all incidents had been reported. 

https://bulliedacademics.blogspot.com/2025/10/academic-bullies-leave-no-trace.html

Academic bullies leave no trace

Academic bullying has recently received much greater attention from stakeholders and decision-makers in the scientific community through news coverage, actions taken against culpable lab leaders, and serious corrective measures taken by large institutions. Though some reports claim higher rates of bullying in academic compared to non-academic settings, one suspects there would have been an even larger gap between these two settings if all incidents were reported. 

Possible reasons for unreported incidents of bullying include, but are not limited to, (i) lack of robust and easy-to-access institutional protocols for reporting incidence, (ii) feelings of insecurity among lab members about their positions and dependence on monthly paychecks, (iii) fear of being fired, (iv) fear of being treated unfairly, and (v) concerns over receiving substandard recommendations for future jobs. These issues are much more threatening for international students/scholars, who are in the US on visas and therefore feel more pressure than domestic lab workers. 

To date, reported incidents of academic bullying have consisted mainly of insults, snubs and/or invasions of privacy by lab leaders. However, higher-level and more serious types of bullying include violations of intellectual property and unfair crediting of authors in scientific publications. 

These kinds of abusive behaviors cause serious and long-lasting effects on both the academic and personal lives of targets and their families. It is therefore pressing that academic institutions and funding agencies offer clear, fair, and accessible protocols for students/scholars to report abusive behaviors of any kind, as free as possible of concerns about recrimination. Ideally, institutions could play a key role in reducing academic bullying by designing fair and thorough reporting systems and minimizing the possibility of reprisal. It should be noted that though well-intentioned institutions may believe their investigations of bullying to be fair and unbiased, their corrective actions against bullies may be insufficient, for several reasons.

A central issue is concern of possible damage to the reputation of the institution. Another important issue is that, compared with bullies in other types of workplaces, bullies in academia are likely to be intelligent enough to leave minimal evidence of their inappropriate actions; e.g., they may use phone or individual meetings rather than emails or public/group meetings to attempt to exercise power over a bullying target. In order to improperly take control of intellectual property or inappropriately alter author positioning, academic bullies may force their targets to sign falsified consent forms stating that they made no contribution or have no rights to publications/patents that actually arose from their own work.

One way for institutions and other stakeholders to combat bullying would be to create strategic plans to identify and eliminate these more-sophisticated forms of false documentation. One strategy might be to create a team of multidisciplinary expert investigators (including lawyers and psychologists) to examine all such documentation for signs of coercion or inaccuracy. In addition, specific trainings should be offered to those at risk of abuse (e.g., students and postdocs) on how report bullying, even when confronted with intelligent bullies who attempt to leave no trace.

From: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6726746/