At
the University of Newcastle in Australia, 15 people reported in our
survey that they had been gagged by the University. As well as these
fifteen individuals, we have had additional reports of ex-staff being
gagged.
We estimate that each of these were given around $250,000 or more e.g.
additional funding into their super. This amount is low compared to the
payouts of senior executives who have had their contracts paid out -
these executives earn over $350,000 per year.
Conservatively this means that the University has spent $3.75 MILLION
(15 x $250,000) on getting ex-staff to keep quiet about what happened to
them. A number of those gagged reported being harassed and bullied for
exposing misconduct.
http://stop-b-uon.blogspot.com.au
October 02, 2013
September 26, 2013
Silenced: Uni’s £1.8m gagging orders
The University of Sheffield has
spent over £1.8 million taking out controversial ‘gagging orders’ on
former staff members in the last five years.
Compromise agreements with confidentiality
clauses, known informally as ‘gagging orders’, have been issued to
members of staff leaving employment for reasons other than early
retirement. They are now known as settlement agreements following the
Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013.
The agreements are used when the University
is in dispute with a staff member and are made through a voluntary
process where both the University and the employee are legally
represented. But unions fear that employees may sign compromise
agreements because they fear the stress associated with taking legal
action or remaining in work.
The Trades Union Congress (TUC) said: “We
are seriously concerned that the new legislative provisions on the
admissibility of settlement offers and discussions in unfair dismissal
cases will send a signal to employers that they are free to sack staff
for arbitrary reasons without needing to follow a fair disciplinary
procedure.
“Whilst employees will have a theoretical
right to turn the employer’s offer down, many will consider they have no
genuine choice other than to accept the sum of money and leave their
job. Many employees will accept the offer simply because they assume it
is a foregone conclusion they will be dismissed if they do not.
“Others will fear that they will be bullied
or victimised if they remain in the job. The provisions are therefore
open to abuse by employers and could have a detrimental effect on wider
employment relations.”
The University said that “the decision to
compromise is made taking into consideration factors including the
beneficial impact to all parties through timely resolution to the
dispute, the commercial impact of resolution, and the effective
management of personal and or organisational risk.”
A former University employee who signed a compromise agreement told Forge Press:
“Such is the stress of taking legal action against powerful
organisations that many employees choose to sign a compromise agreement
containing a gagging clause rather than pursue legal action and put
their health in jeopardy.”
Cllr Shaffaq Mohammed, leader of the
Liberal Democrat Group on Sheffield city council, described the figures
as “worrying”, going on to say: “When such large sums are being spent on
these agreements students have every right to know why this money isn’t
being invested in university services instead. As one of the largest
and most respected institutions in our city, the University of
Sheffield should be setting an example to other employers.”
Compromise agreements have been a
contentious issue in the area recently, sparking outrage from local
people when it was discovered that Sheffield city council had spent
almost £200,000 on the orders since 2011.
Sheffield city council spent £28,000 on
compromise agreements in 2011 and £162,530 in the 2012-2013 period, with
many of their compromise agreements including the controversial
confidentiality clauses. But the University of Sheffield’s spend dwarfs
this – with £196,907 spent on gagging orders in 2011 alone, more than
seven times the amount spent by the council in that year, despite having
only 6,031 employees compared to the council’s 18,000 plus.
The number of agreements made and the costs
incurred are subject to annual scrutiny by the University’s senior
remuneration committee, made up of the vice-chancellor and
non-University staff.
The University has racked up almost £2 million worth of the controversial clauses in the past five years, peaking in 2009 when 24 agreements were made at a cost of £549,589.
In total, the University has made 102
compromise agreements with confidentiality clauses since 2008, resulting
in a total spend of £1,835,498.
These figures also tower over the
“concerning” spend of almost half a million pounds at the University of
York. When the University of York Students’ Union officers found out
about the £479,464 spend on confidentiality clauses since 2008, the
spending was criticised as “careless”.
Kallum Taylor, York Students’ Union
president, told York student paper Nouse: “These numbers are obviously
concerning. Obviously we don’t know the ins and outs, but 80k a year
could go a hell of a long way elsewhere for students here. Students are
now paying a fortune, and their financial stake in the University has
increased dramatically. Scrutiny on spending should be higher than ever,
and this type of business shouldn’t be carelessly accepted as a norm.”
University of Sheffield Students’ Union president Ally Buckle declined to comment on the figures. A human resources spokesperson for the
University said: “The University of Sheffield has a well deserved
reputation as an excellent employer committed to developing a culture of
excellence, collaboration, innovation, commitment and respect.
“The University is proactive in ensuring
that it promotes and develops its staff capability, and considers a
range of employment options to address any shortcomings which, when the
circumstances warrant it, include compromise agreements. We take care to
ensure this approach is only used voluntarily, and in circumstances
where both parties have agreed it’s the best course of action,
frequently in discussion with trade unions.
“The number of cases and University of Sheffield spending on such
agreements is low when compared to other sectors. Over the past six
years, spending has been at an average of around £18,000 per case,
representing a tiny fraction of our total £1.1bn staff budget over the
same six years.”
September 05, 2013
Failure to investigate bullying claim costs $350,000
Three Queensland Appeal Court judges have upheld a security guard’s
appeal and awarded her $364,008 in damages for a psychiatric illness
caused by her manager “verbally” abusing her.
QCA President Justice Margaret McMurdo and Justice Robert Gotterson and Ann Lyons ruled University of Sunshine Coast’s (USC) failure to investigate and take action on an earlier bullying and harassment complaint left staff unreasonably exposed to risk of damage.
USC security guard Gjenie Wolters brought action against her employer on the grounds it had breached its duty of care by failing to provide a safe place of work. She alleged she developed a “debilitating psychiatric illness” after her line manager Mark Bradley verbally assaulted her in March 2008.
Wolters alleged Bradley “aggressively confronted” her, waved his arms at her and yelled while accusing her of abandoning her duties during a blackout. She said she attempted to explain her conduct, but Bradley did not want to discuss the matter and “stormed off”.
Wolters lodged a grievance with USC HR the next day but the unit “declined to investigate her grievance”.
Bradley, the judges heard, had been the subject of a bullying and harassment complaint some months earlier to Wolters’ grievance. Another female security guard, Heather Carney, lodged a complaint Bradley verbally assaulted her and threatened her position.
Carney voluntarily left USC but did not withdraw her complaint...
Former USC vice-chancellor Thomas said Bradley had a history of raising his voice to security staff. But Thomas did not regard it as bullying as security staff were “quite different from the normal people who populate universities” and used to being yelled at.
The Appeal Court judges upheld Wolters’ argument USC’s failure to investigate the Carney complaint meant “no consideration was given to specific aspects of Mr Bradley’s conduct about which he should have been counselled”. “It follows logically the appropriate reprimand and counselling Mr Bradley would have been given would have placed considerable emphasis on bringing that deficiency to his attention and counselling him to check his facts first before criticising other staff members.”
The judges awarded Wolters $364,008 and ordered USC to pay her legal costs for the appeal.
From: http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/workplace/2013/08/28/failure-to-investigate-bullying-claim-costs-350000/
QCA President Justice Margaret McMurdo and Justice Robert Gotterson and Ann Lyons ruled University of Sunshine Coast’s (USC) failure to investigate and take action on an earlier bullying and harassment complaint left staff unreasonably exposed to risk of damage.
USC security guard Gjenie Wolters brought action against her employer on the grounds it had breached its duty of care by failing to provide a safe place of work. She alleged she developed a “debilitating psychiatric illness” after her line manager Mark Bradley verbally assaulted her in March 2008.
Wolters alleged Bradley “aggressively confronted” her, waved his arms at her and yelled while accusing her of abandoning her duties during a blackout. She said she attempted to explain her conduct, but Bradley did not want to discuss the matter and “stormed off”.
Wolters lodged a grievance with USC HR the next day but the unit “declined to investigate her grievance”.
Bradley, the judges heard, had been the subject of a bullying and harassment complaint some months earlier to Wolters’ grievance. Another female security guard, Heather Carney, lodged a complaint Bradley verbally assaulted her and threatened her position.
Carney voluntarily left USC but did not withdraw her complaint...
Former USC vice-chancellor Thomas said Bradley had a history of raising his voice to security staff. But Thomas did not regard it as bullying as security staff were “quite different from the normal people who populate universities” and used to being yelled at.
The Appeal Court judges upheld Wolters’ argument USC’s failure to investigate the Carney complaint meant “no consideration was given to specific aspects of Mr Bradley’s conduct about which he should have been counselled”. “It follows logically the appropriate reprimand and counselling Mr Bradley would have been given would have placed considerable emphasis on bringing that deficiency to his attention and counselling him to check his facts first before criticising other staff members.”
The judges awarded Wolters $364,008 and ordered USC to pay her legal costs for the appeal.
From: http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/workplace/2013/08/28/failure-to-investigate-bullying-claim-costs-350000/
Prevalence and Forms of Workplace Bullying Among University Employees
Over the past decade, a growing number of Anglo-American and
Scandinavian researchers have documented the extent to which the
university environment provides opportunities for workplace bullying. By
contrast, there has been a visible lack of similar studies in
non-Western national contexts, such as the Czech Republic and other
Central Eastern European (CEE) countries.
The present article addresses this gap by reporting the findings of the first large-scale study into workplace bullying among university employees in the Czech Republic. The exposure to bullying was assessed with the Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised (NAQ-R) in a sample of 1,533 university employees. The results showed that 13.6 % of the respondents were classified as bullying targets based on an operational definition of bullying (weekly exposure to one negative act), while 7.9 % of the respondents were identified as targets based on self-reports. This prevalence is comparable to bullying rates in Scandinavia but considerably lower than in Anglo-American universities.
Differences between Anglo-American and Czech universities were also found with respect to the status of perpetrators (bullying was perpetrated mostly by individual supervisors in the Czech sample), perceived causes of bullying (structural causes perceived as relatively unimportant in the Czech sample), and targets’ responses to bullying (minimal use of formal responses in the Czech sample). The authors propose that cross-cultural differences as well as differences between the Anglo-American model of “neoliberal university” and the Czech model of university governance based on “academic oligarchy” can be used to explain these different findings.
From: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10672-012-9210-x
The present article addresses this gap by reporting the findings of the first large-scale study into workplace bullying among university employees in the Czech Republic. The exposure to bullying was assessed with the Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised (NAQ-R) in a sample of 1,533 university employees. The results showed that 13.6 % of the respondents were classified as bullying targets based on an operational definition of bullying (weekly exposure to one negative act), while 7.9 % of the respondents were identified as targets based on self-reports. This prevalence is comparable to bullying rates in Scandinavia but considerably lower than in Anglo-American universities.
Differences between Anglo-American and Czech universities were also found with respect to the status of perpetrators (bullying was perpetrated mostly by individual supervisors in the Czech sample), perceived causes of bullying (structural causes perceived as relatively unimportant in the Czech sample), and targets’ responses to bullying (minimal use of formal responses in the Czech sample). The authors propose that cross-cultural differences as well as differences between the Anglo-American model of “neoliberal university” and the Czech model of university governance based on “academic oligarchy” can be used to explain these different findings.
From: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10672-012-9210-x
August 16, 2013
THE Best University Workplace Survey: staff unheard?
Around
four in 10 university employees feel unable to make their voices heard
within their institutions, according to preliminary findings from the
first Times Higher Education Best University Workplace Survey.
Analysis
of the first 2,300 responses to the survey, which is still open to all
university employees, reveals that 37 per cent disagree with the
statement: “I can make my voice heard within my university.”
The figure rises to 56 per cent when including those who neither agree nor disagree.
“There is de facto no meaningful management at an everyday level,” says one senior lecturer at a university in the South West of England. “Shop-floor problems such as too few teaching staff are usually ignored by managers and dealt with by staff ad hoc.
“There is almost no meaningful forward planning beyond thinking about the needs of [the research excellence framework], or branding issues such as the National Student Survey.”
A respondent from another institution, who works as an IT technician, sums up the concerns of many respondents, saying: “Communication between staff and senior management tends to be a bottleneck in both directions. Senior management makes all the right noises – but never checks that it is happening in practice.”
However, although many employees appear to feel overlooked by their institution’s hierarchy, the vast majority enjoy working with their peers. Just 6 per cent say they do not, with some 47 per cent “strongly agreeing” when asked if they enjoy working with their immediate colleagues.
“My department is particularly good at supporting early career academics. I have worked at other institutions where levels of exploitation are appalling but [my department] is especially sensitive to the needs of [such] staff and proactive in ensuring they get the support and career development they need,” says one academic at a Russell Group university.
A professor at a 1994 Group institution adds: “My line manager is an excellent, responsive, can-do sort of person who really cares about his academic colleagues. My department has really good morale.”
The Best University Workplace Survey is open to all UK higher education staff. John Gill, THE’s editor, said: “The larger the number of people that participate in the survey, the more detailed will be the picture that we piece together about working life in our universities.
“Our intention in this first year of the survey is simply to get an idea of the areas in which universities are performing well as employers, and those where they need to do more.”
From: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk
The figure rises to 56 per cent when including those who neither agree nor disagree.
“There is de facto no meaningful management at an everyday level,” says one senior lecturer at a university in the South West of England. “Shop-floor problems such as too few teaching staff are usually ignored by managers and dealt with by staff ad hoc.
“There is almost no meaningful forward planning beyond thinking about the needs of [the research excellence framework], or branding issues such as the National Student Survey.”
A respondent from another institution, who works as an IT technician, sums up the concerns of many respondents, saying: “Communication between staff and senior management tends to be a bottleneck in both directions. Senior management makes all the right noises – but never checks that it is happening in practice.”
However, although many employees appear to feel overlooked by their institution’s hierarchy, the vast majority enjoy working with their peers. Just 6 per cent say they do not, with some 47 per cent “strongly agreeing” when asked if they enjoy working with their immediate colleagues.
“My department is particularly good at supporting early career academics. I have worked at other institutions where levels of exploitation are appalling but [my department] is especially sensitive to the needs of [such] staff and proactive in ensuring they get the support and career development they need,” says one academic at a Russell Group university.
A professor at a 1994 Group institution adds: “My line manager is an excellent, responsive, can-do sort of person who really cares about his academic colleagues. My department has really good morale.”
The Best University Workplace Survey is open to all UK higher education staff. John Gill, THE’s editor, said: “The larger the number of people that participate in the survey, the more detailed will be the picture that we piece together about working life in our universities.
“Our intention in this first year of the survey is simply to get an idea of the areas in which universities are performing well as employers, and those where they need to do more.”
From: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk
Exeter’s rankings success gained at staff’s expense
League table success at the University of Exeter may have been gained
at the expense of staff, who claim to have experienced “undue stress”,
“bullying”, sexism and a “loss of voice”, according to an internal
report.
A group convened at the request of management and led by Nicky Britten, professor of applied healthcare research at the institution, has identified a “top-down management” culture as a source of problems at Exeter.
Based on 288 responses from the university’s 3,900 staff, the report says that many people found the senior management team remote, with major decisions being “made by a small group of people behind closed doors without consultation”.
“The tone of communication (described as ‘hectoring’) might have been appropriate for managing underperformance ten years ago, but is inappropriate now,” reads the report, which was presented to the university’s council, alongside the senior management’s response, on 21 February.
Many staff felt their opinions were ignored, “with no acknowledgment or feedback”, it adds. The group also documents “some alarming reports of bullying, manipulative and unpleasant behaviour” by particular senior managers and a feeling among some that the university “is a self-perpetuating male-dominated culture” with policies such as maternity leave not taken seriously.
“There are reports of men making casual sexist remarks…referring to women as ‘girls’, promoting men over women (despite the women having equal or better CVs),” it adds.
The investigation was initiated after the university’s wider staff survey of 2012, which found that 36 per cent reported feeling unduly stressed, compared with a benchmark figure at universities conducting the same survey of 28 per cent.
The survey also found that only 60 per cent said they felt able to voice opinions, compared with a sector benchmark of 76 per cent.
Exeter vice-chancellor Sir Steve Smith told Times Higher Education that senior management would respond to the concerns identified by the group, and in many cases had already made changes.
Expanding student numbers and raising Exeter from an average ranking position of 34th in the UK during the 1990s to the top 10 today had meant being “very centralist”, he said. However, efforts were now being made to try to reverse this.
Exeter had already reinstated academic heads of discipline to decision- making positions on the university’s college executives and was on a recruitment drive that would reduce workloads, he said.
“I could have written to staff saying ‘we’ve got the [2012] survey results and we did better [than] or the same [as the benchmark] in 17 out of 25 [areas]’, but the truth is I know that there are tensions…We’re trying to be as open as possible,” Sir Steve said. The problem would now be working out how widespread the concerns were and whether or not they were historical, he added.
However, co-president of the Exeter branch of the University and College Union, Jo Melling, said the union felt that senior management’s response did “not meet the needs outlined” by the group.
“In particular, we are concerned that the vice-chancellor’s executive group has not recognised the issue about voice and governance that the group clearly flagged up,” he said, pointing to recommendations that the university commission an independent review of distribution of power within the institution.
Management has said that the university’s governance will be assessed in 2014 as part of its regular five-yearly reviews.
From: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk
A group convened at the request of management and led by Nicky Britten, professor of applied healthcare research at the institution, has identified a “top-down management” culture as a source of problems at Exeter.
Based on 288 responses from the university’s 3,900 staff, the report says that many people found the senior management team remote, with major decisions being “made by a small group of people behind closed doors without consultation”.
“The tone of communication (described as ‘hectoring’) might have been appropriate for managing underperformance ten years ago, but is inappropriate now,” reads the report, which was presented to the university’s council, alongside the senior management’s response, on 21 February.
Many staff felt their opinions were ignored, “with no acknowledgment or feedback”, it adds. The group also documents “some alarming reports of bullying, manipulative and unpleasant behaviour” by particular senior managers and a feeling among some that the university “is a self-perpetuating male-dominated culture” with policies such as maternity leave not taken seriously.
“There are reports of men making casual sexist remarks…referring to women as ‘girls’, promoting men over women (despite the women having equal or better CVs),” it adds.
The investigation was initiated after the university’s wider staff survey of 2012, which found that 36 per cent reported feeling unduly stressed, compared with a benchmark figure at universities conducting the same survey of 28 per cent.
The survey also found that only 60 per cent said they felt able to voice opinions, compared with a sector benchmark of 76 per cent.
Exeter vice-chancellor Sir Steve Smith told Times Higher Education that senior management would respond to the concerns identified by the group, and in many cases had already made changes.
Expanding student numbers and raising Exeter from an average ranking position of 34th in the UK during the 1990s to the top 10 today had meant being “very centralist”, he said. However, efforts were now being made to try to reverse this.
Exeter had already reinstated academic heads of discipline to decision- making positions on the university’s college executives and was on a recruitment drive that would reduce workloads, he said.
“I could have written to staff saying ‘we’ve got the [2012] survey results and we did better [than] or the same [as the benchmark] in 17 out of 25 [areas]’, but the truth is I know that there are tensions…We’re trying to be as open as possible,” Sir Steve said. The problem would now be working out how widespread the concerns were and whether or not they were historical, he added.
However, co-president of the Exeter branch of the University and College Union, Jo Melling, said the union felt that senior management’s response did “not meet the needs outlined” by the group.
“In particular, we are concerned that the vice-chancellor’s executive group has not recognised the issue about voice and governance that the group clearly flagged up,” he said, pointing to recommendations that the university commission an independent review of distribution of power within the institution.
Management has said that the university’s governance will be assessed in 2014 as part of its regular five-yearly reviews.
From: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk
July 25, 2013
Aberystwyth University president rejects 'dictatorship' claim by union
Allegations that one of
Wales' leading universities is being run "like a dictatorship" have been
dismissed by its president, Sir Emyr Jones Parry. The University and College Union (UCU) claims Aberystwyth
University managers are behaving like school ground bullies and staff are
fearful for their jobs. Sir Emyr said: "I don't believe the views set out are representative and I don't recognise the picture." The union also claims university staff were suspended over trivial matters. The university said it was "perplexed" by the accusations, which it said had not been brought to its attention.
Since new vice chancellor April McMahon took over the role in August 2011, 11 members of staff have been suspended and 13 have had their employment terminated, it has been reported. Martin Wilding, president of UCU at Aberystwyth, said staff were "literally looking over their shoulder," adding there was a sense they were under "constant surveillance".
He claimed there was also no sense of "due process" and "justice" over the suspensions, adding there was a conflict between management and staff that was "a sort of repressive relationship". "If people speak out they feel that they are going to be punished," he said. "There are rumours of people disappearing, and it sounds like a South American state when you say that, but people have sort of disappeared off the radar screen, as it were." He added: "Invariably people are brought into a meeting on a one-to-one basis and suspended and dragged off campus".
BBC Wales spoke to other current and former members of staff who declined to speak publically about their experiences of working at Aberystwyth University for fear of reprisals. But they claimed they were bullied, intimidated and harassed by senior managers.
Speaking on BBC Radio Wales, university president Sir Emyr Jones Parry said the union, one of four representing staff on the campus, had not formally raised any issue, even as recently as a scheduled meeting with management last week.
The most high profile of the alleged suspensions involved two officers from the Aberystwyth arts centre - director Alan Hewson and operations manager Auriel Martin. Mr Hewson has retired and Ms Martin is the subject of an internal disciplinary investigation. Last month a protest stopped traffic on the campus in support of the pair but the university said it could not comment on matters involving individual members of staff. Councillor Sue Jones Davies claimed the relationship between the university and the town was strained.
More info at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-23301526
Since new vice chancellor April McMahon took over the role in August 2011, 11 members of staff have been suspended and 13 have had their employment terminated, it has been reported. Martin Wilding, president of UCU at Aberystwyth, said staff were "literally looking over their shoulder," adding there was a sense they were under "constant surveillance".
He claimed there was also no sense of "due process" and "justice" over the suspensions, adding there was a conflict between management and staff that was "a sort of repressive relationship". "If people speak out they feel that they are going to be punished," he said. "There are rumours of people disappearing, and it sounds like a South American state when you say that, but people have sort of disappeared off the radar screen, as it were." He added: "Invariably people are brought into a meeting on a one-to-one basis and suspended and dragged off campus".
BBC Wales spoke to other current and former members of staff who declined to speak publically about their experiences of working at Aberystwyth University for fear of reprisals. But they claimed they were bullied, intimidated and harassed by senior managers.
Speaking on BBC Radio Wales, university president Sir Emyr Jones Parry said the union, one of four representing staff on the campus, had not formally raised any issue, even as recently as a scheduled meeting with management last week.
Sir Emyr Jones Parry said due process was 'rigorously applied' at Aberystwyth University. He said: "I don't believe the views set out are representative and I don't recognise the picture. "If there was any suggestion this was rampant in the university, believe me, I would have been on the case." "I'm not saying I haven't heard of the problems. They were not raised officially in any meeting." He rebutted the union's claim over a lack of due process in management actions. He said: "No-one has not been subject to due process. I can assure you. "Due process is rigorously applied in Aberystwyth."
The most high profile of the alleged suspensions involved two officers from the Aberystwyth arts centre - director Alan Hewson and operations manager Auriel Martin. Mr Hewson has retired and Ms Martin is the subject of an internal disciplinary investigation. Last month a protest stopped traffic on the campus in support of the pair but the university said it could not comment on matters involving individual members of staff. Councillor Sue Jones Davies claimed the relationship between the university and the town was strained.
More info at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-23301526
July 14, 2013
Summer readings...
Update on Denis Rancourt academic freedom case
Bullying of a PhD Student - One Wrong Word/Death by Paper Cuts
Petition: Vice Chancellor, University of Leeds - Stop Treating International Students Like 2nd Class Citizens!
Institute of Communications Studies, University of Leeds
The University of Ulster
University of Leicester defies Information Commissioner (and gets away with it)
Prof. Hassan Abdalla is still at it...
July 01, 2013
Update on Denis Rancourt academic freedom case
Dear colleagues,
As you probably know, the legal case of my 2009 dismissal from my tenured Full Professorship at the University of Ottawa has been on-going for many years:
http://rancourt.
As you probably know, the legal case of my 2009 dismissal from my tenured Full Professorship at the University of Ottawa has been on-going for many years:
http://rancourt.
Well, the binding labour arbitration hearings are finally over! The last day of hearings was June 26, 2013. We expect the arbitrator Claude Foisy's decision within 4 to 6 months.
In my opinion, the hearing was a modern Socratic trial, with the University's arguments explicitly alternating between "corrupting the youth" and "insulting important people". The media reports thankfully saw this as a tactic.
Link to mainstream media reports about the final days of the hearings are given in this blog post:
http://uofowatch.blogspot.ca/
For example, this video about anarchists was played during the hearings in the lengthy cross-examination of me, because it was in one of my many YouTube playlists:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
The Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) attended virtually all the hearings:
http://ocla.ca/closing-
Cheers,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)