Howard Fredrics seeks redress at Kingston University (UK)

The bureaucratized university plays havoc with bright, creative minds. In July of 2006, Diana Winstanley, a 45-year-old professor in the School of Human Resource Management at Kingston University, hanged herself. As at many other universities, a significant number of faculty have been on leave in recent years for occupational stress.

American-born Howard Fredrics, a senior lecturer in music at Kingston until his formal dismissal in 2006, has published a well-documented multi-media website on the conflict that led to his ouster and his efforts since then for redress, and on similar conflicts involving other faculty at Kingston. The website is also useful for its critique of British employment law, in particular the easily abused "some other substantial reason" for an employee's dismissal. Of particular interest in Fredrics's own case is the ganging up of eleven colleagues and their filing a collective grievance against him, apparently with the administration's encouragement, following his own formal complaint of administrative ill-treatment.

The mire of legal twists and turns since then is deep, involving charges of witness intimidation, anti-Semitism, and much else.

From: http://www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/mobnews06.htm#KIN

Howard needs our support and our solidarity. He is facing difficulties that show bias against him by the legal system. His health is suffering, his career more than likely ruined, and the financial cost has been huge.

Please write emails of complaint and support for Howard to Kingston University Press Office: press@kingston.ac.uk

Howard's supportive local MP is Vincent Cable:

Constituency Office:
2a Lion Road, Twickenham TW1 4JQ, England

Phone: 020 8892 0215, 020 8892 0218

Vincent Cable should be encouraged to take the matter further.
-----------------------
Do nothing and watch from the sidelines as an academic career and life is ruined, or do something however small, for if we all do it then it may have some impact. Please act today.

Teachers take bullying claim to commission

Staff at the Conservatorium High School claim the Department of Education has failed to protect them from bullying.

In the NSW Industrial Relations Commission yesterday, teachers said the department had failed to carry out a risk assessment of workplace bullying at the prestigious music school, which the Teachers Federation said had been promised as early as November 2005.

Two teachers have complained to their union of their treatment by the school's principal, Robert Curry. The federation said one of those allegations had come before the commission last year.

One of the complainants, Allan Scott-Rogers, was dismissed by Dr Curry on the final day of term last year.

Dr Curry said yesterday he could not comment and he had been instructed to send inquiries about the case to the department's media office. The department said it was unable to comment because the matter was before the commission, but it said at the time of Mr Scott-Rogers's dismissal that his termination was the result of subject changes.

The federation's industrial officer, Joan Lemaire, told the commission that members had asked the department for a risk assessment and risk management plan following the commission complaint last year. But the department resisted until Tuesday night, after the federation had lodged a dispute with the commission.

"There was no risk management plan or risk assessment conducted at the conservatorium either in 2005 or during 2006 or in 2007 and it now finally appears after our dispute notification that there may be a risk assessment and development plan in relation to workplace bullying," Ms Lemaire said.

But Bev Charlton, appearing for the department, said the organisation had fulfilled its legal obligations and taken several measures to prevent bullying at the school, including implementing mediation, professional development sessions and communication protocols. [The organisation met its legal obligations!]

Justice Schmidt ordered the parties to report back to the commission next month. "We will find an agreed way forward and through that process find a way of settling this school down, because all of these exhibits show me that things have become unfortunately unsettled," she said.

From: Sydney Morning Herald

Coping, surviving, fighting back

UCU are you listening?
Local MPs and Higher Education spokesmen/women, are you listening?
In fact, is anybody listening?

'...the big challenge is to come up with a programme of action for surviving and thriving in the face of mobbing. That's a tall order. Davenport, Schwartz and Elliott describe options ranging from grieving, building self-esteem, using humour and taking care in choosing professional help. They also give advice on how family and friends are affected and how they can help. All this is quite valuable, but it is clear that there is no guaranteed way of getting through a serious case of mobbing. It often may be best to leave for another job...'

From: Martin Brian, 2000, Insight and advice about workplace bullying

'...Thus, these individuals [targets of bullying] find themselves in a prolonged stress- and in a prolonged trauma-creating situation. Instead of a short, acute (and normal!) PTSD reaction that can subside after several days or weeks, theirs is constantly renewed: new traumata and new sources of anxiety arise in a constant stream during which time the individual experiences rights violations that further undermine his or her self-confidence and psychological health. The unwieldy social situation for these individuals consists not only of severe psychological trauma but of an extremely prolonged stress condition that seriously threatens the individual's socio-economic existence. Torn out of their social network, the majority of mobbing victims face the threat of early retirement, with permanent psychological damage...'

From: Heinz Leiman, How serious are Psychological problems after mobbing?

'...Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a natural emotional reaction to a deeply shocking and disturbing experience. It is a normal reaction to an abnormal situation...'

...It seems that Complex PTSD can potentially arise from any prolonged period of negative stress in which certain factors are present, which may include any of captivity, lack of means of escape, entrapment, repeated violation of boundaries, betrayal, rejection, bewilderment, confusion, and - crucially - lack of control, loss of control and disempowerment. It is the overwhelming nature of the events and the inability (helplessness, lack of knowledge, lack of support etc) of the person trying to deal with those events that leads to the development of Complex PTSD. Situations which might give rise to Complex PTSD include bullying, harassment, abuse, domestic violence, stalking, long-term caring for a disabled relative, unresolved grief, exam stress over a period of years, mounting debt, contact experience, etc...

...The UK has one of the highest adult suicide rates in Europe: around 5000 a year. The number of adults in the UK committing suicide because of bullying is unknown. Each year 19,000 children attempt suicide in the UK - one every half hour. in the UK, suicide is the number one cause of death for 18-24-year-old males.

...The prolonged (chronic) negative stress resulting from bullying has lead to threat of loss of job, career, health, livelihood, often also resulting in threat to marriage and family life. The family are the unseen victims of bullying...

...The person who is being bullied often thinks they are going mad, and may be encouraged in this belief by those who do not have that person's best interests at heart. They are not going mad; PTSD is an injury, not an illness...'

From: http://www.bullyonline.org/stress/ptsd.htm

'... Consider leaving - regard it as a positive decision in the face of overwhelming odds which are not of your choosing, not of you making, and over which you have no control. Serial bullies are obsessive and compulsive in their behaviour; once they start on their target they won't let go until that person is destroyed. For most people, the top priority is to be financially stable. What's more important - job or health? You may need to make the decision to move on and find an employer who values you and your skills. Refuse to allow your health to be destroyed and your career wrecked by an idiot...

... Consider suing for personal injury - solicitors may now do this on a no win no fee basis. Bear in mind that this might take 3 years (County Court - awards up to £50,000) or 5 years (High Court - awards over £50,000) or more. For many though, especially those suffering trauma, the legal system can be more abusive than the original bullying. Defence lawyers will often string out the proceedings as long as possible in the hope you'll get fed up and go away, or run out of money, or become so ill you'll have to withdraw, or even die. What a nice world we live in. They're also likely to go through your past and dig up any trauma (including bereavement) and claim that is the origin of your present ill health. This process is similar to victims of rape being portrayed as "loose women" and therefore responsible for the rape...

...Consider going public - awareness is rising, the media are interested and sympathetic; ask for anonymity at the outset if required... Bullies think they are above the law - but insist that you stay rigidly within the law...

From: Helpline4u - control a bully

'... Abuse victims should first name the behavior, which gives them a feeling of legitimacy and banishes their shame, Namie said. Then, they should take some time off to heal, check their mental and physical health, explore legal options and build the business case against bullying.

Finally, employees must expose the bully for the sake of their mental health, while knowing they may lose a job, he said.

"In most cases, the bully is believed and the person is not," Namie said. Still, if you remain silent and "leave shrouded in shame, you never get past it."

From: http://www.workdoctor.com/press/newh050505.html

URGENT CALL FOR ASSISTANCE - Tell the truth about life at Kingston University - UK

Have you worked for Kingston University?

Have you been mistreated by the University?

Were you bullied and/or unfairly dismissed?

We want to know YOUR story.

Tell us about what happened to you.

We promise to keep it STRICTLY confidential.

Send e-mail to: blowthewhistle@sirpeterscott.com

Mean and Nasty Academics: Bullying, Hazing, and Mobbing

“Tenure is supposed to protect scholars from outside control, but it does a lousy job of protecting them from one another.”
-- Kenneth Westhues, quoted in The Chronicle of Higher Education

I don't usually post my newsletters here, but I think this is a subject that needs to get more airing. So here is the text of my latest newsletter, called "Mean and Nasty Academics." (If you'd like to sign up for my bi-weekly (sometimes less frequent) newsletter, go to this page, which also lists the bonuses you will receive.)

Another reason I'm posting this newsletter issue is that I have received some interesting replies from my newsletter readers that will help those of you struggling with these issues. I will put these replies up in later posts.

Mean and Nasty Academics

"I was surprised to experience hazing as a graduate student, not once, but continually and by multiple professors… I watched how some of the other women faculty members in the department were treated, and they were second-class citizens at best." (Twale and De Luca, 2008, p.84)

"A tenured full female prof gets up to talk, and an untenured junior faculty man tells her that her ideas are not really important, that it may be a concern of hers but not ours. And the entire faculty went along with it, including the women... Be invisible. We weren’t supposed to say anything, even the strong women who could hold their own. Women sensed they were in a powerless position." [Ibid, p.85]

As an academic coach, I could add many more examples of graduate students and professors of all ranks being victimized by mean, nasty, harsh, underhanded, passive aggressive or bullying behavior at the hands of other academics.

The only reason I don’t give you details of what my clients have told me over the years is that I need to protect the identity of the victims. However, I’m not giving anything away if I tell you that I have heard numerous examples of departments ganging up on one individual, of professors being shunned, of tenured professors harassing other tenured professors, and of incredibly harsh treatment of graduate students by their advisors or other professors.

Bullying and emotional abuse don’t only exist in academia (see Mobbing: Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace). But Darla Twale and Barbara De Luca, the authors of Faculty Incivility: The Rise of the Academic Bully Culture and What to Do About It, suggest that there has been an increase in “bullying, mobbing, camouflaged aggression, and harassment” (p. xii) within academia.

In working with people who have been the victims of bullying, I find that one of their first needs is reassurance that they did not do anything to deserve such treatment. So let me say that No one, ever, under any circumstances, deserves to be humiliated, undermined, insulted, shunned, marginalized, ganged up on, or even spoken to harshly. If it has happened to you, you did not cause it to happen. And you are not alone.

What Can I Do About Bullying?

There is no space here to review the reasons that academics can be so cruel to one another. Instead, I’ll focus on what you can do about it. The following suggestions are summarized from the Twale and De Luca book; additional comments from me are in brackets.

Avoid becoming part of an abusive department. Before you attend graduate school or accept a job, do your homework. Look at faculty turnover rates, policies and guidelines regarding harassment, and level of enforcement of such policies as seen in grievance filings and resolutions...

Written by Gina Hiatt, Ph.D.

From: http://academicladder.com/mean-and-nasty-academics

Whistleblowers...

Whistleblowers are part of society's alarm and self-repair system, bringing attention to problems before they become far more damaging. Australian whistleblowers have spoken out about police corruption, paedophilia in the churches, corporate mismanagement, biased appointment procedures, environmentally harmful practices and a host of other issues.

Although whistleblowers are extremely valuable to society, most of them suffer enormously for their efforts. Ostracism, harassment, slander, reprimands, referral to psychiatrists, demotion, dismissal and blacklisting are among the common methods used to attack whistleblowers. Bosses are the usual attackers with co-workers sometimes joining in.

Many whistleblowers are conscientious, high-performing employees who believe that the system works. That's why they speak out. They believe that by alerting others to a problem, it will be dealt with. Many do not think of themselves as whistleblowers at all - they believe they are just doing their job. So they are shaken to the core when the response to their public-spirited efforts is to vilify them as disloyal, to question their work performance, to withdraw emotional support and to mount attacks. As well as suffering financial losses and severe stress, whistleblowers are at increased risk of relationship breakdown and health problems.

Even worse than this, though, few whistleblowers seem to bring about any change in the problem they speak out about. The treatment of whistleblowers is a double disaster for society: capable and courageous individuals are attacked and sometimes destroyed, while the original problems are left to fester.

From: http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/pubs/05overland.html, by Professor Brian Martin

Bully in Sight: How to Predict, Resist, Challenge and Combat Workplace Bullying

...A feature of bullying which is not generally appreciated is that in the months (which may exceed a year) which immediately follow cessation of employment (whether through termination or ill-health absence) the traumatised victim is often physically unable to touch anything which reminds them of their experience. Many victims report the strange feeling of sitting in front of large piles knowing the ease with the formerly handled paperwork but feeling paralyzed, unable to touch, read or process any of it...

From: Bully in Sight by Tim Field

Yamada Featured on Bullying in ABA Journal - US

I appreciate Chris Cameron (Southwestern) alerting me to the news that David Yamada's (Suffolk) scholarship on bullying in the workplace got him not only mentioned in this month’s ABA Journal, but also photographed – smile and all – on page 16 (different photograph here, but same great smile).

Some of the article highlights:

In the last several years, legislation has been introduced in 13 states to allow people to sue their employers for bullying or offensive behavior even when the conduct doesn’t meet standards for discrimination or infliction of emotional distress . . .

Much of this percolating legislation was modeled on a draft by David Yamada, a professor at Suffolk Univer­sity Law School in Boston who has been working with Namie. “There are some serious gaps in the law in terms of workplace bullying,” says Yamada, who studies harassment in the workplace.

Yamada says he has experienced or witnessed bullying behavior in the legal world and in academia. Typic­ally, he says, people victimized by bad bosses end up quitting. “It strikes me as being horrifically wrong,” Yamada says, “that targets are the ones to pay the price."

Yamada intends for the legislation to cover at least two categories of workplace bullying. The first is the boss who openly berates employees. The poster child for this type of personality, he says, is the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton. During his 2005 confirmation hearings, he was accused of being a “serial abuser” and “quintessential kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy.”

But Yamada’s proposal doesn’t stop with giving employees grounds to sue the yellers and screamers. He says he would also allow workers to sue for “the more hurtful and insidious” types of conduct—the backstabbing, subtle undermining and sabotaging that exist in many workplaces.

Kudos to David for single-handedly developing and implementing the strategy behind this anti-bullying in the workplace movement.

From: Workplace Prof Blog

Management turns perpetrator as bullying cases soar

As many as seven in ten employees have felt bullied at work with almost half of bullying instigated by management.

The research conducted by Peninsula employment law service shows that bullying has increased significantly since 2003, with 69 per cent of employees saying that they have been exposed to bullying in the workplace, compared to 52 per cent in 2003.

Worryingly, just under half (44 per cent) say the bully is a member of management whilst 56 per cent who have felt victimised say that they were bullied by a work colleague.

Sadly, 62 per cent of those who feel they have been bullied in work say that it has had a detrimental impact on their personal life.

David Price, head of employee relations at Peninsula said he ‘urged’ employers to have a system in place where workers could speak to someone if they felt bullied and said bosses should consider having an Equal Opportunities Policy and an IT policy to prevent cyber bullying.

“When talking to employees it is apparent that those that are bullied by management or their employer are reluctant to work as hard as those that are not bullied. Silent bullying presents a major problem, where someone feels isolated when left out of group discussions and decisions. Employees and employers need to remember that harassment is in the eye of the recipient and the question employers need to consider is whether the situation could be considered severe enough for the employee to take legal action,” said Price.

The research showed that 69 per cent of workers would never consider reporting bullying to their employer whilst 89 per cent are not sure whether their employer has policies relating to bullying and harassment at work.

HR Zone, 20th February 2008

Eliminating Professors - Necessary Harm

...Given the social dynamic in this workplace, it is easy to see why the higher-ups did nothing to rein in the Jerk in. Addressing PITA's complaints would have meant taking on not just an individual harassing male but a cohesive group of male and female workers that was functioning productively in the overall organizational context. Each successive higher level of union or management authority to which PITA appealed was faced with challenging, disrupting, and overruling an even larger part of the organization. How much damage to morale and productivity can a senior official reasonably be expected to risk, for the sake of shielding one partially disaled woman from jokes other women laught at?

"Even so," you may say, "somebody should have done something." This comment has been made in every case I know of Dr. PITA's elimination from a uniersity faculty. It is a common exhoration of kind-hearted people working somewhere else...

From: Eliminating Professors, a guide to the dismissal process, by Kenneth Westhues