I am thankful that finally a debate may be able to commence, in writing, given that the manager who was appointed in 2011 and destroyed the academic department I joined in 2007 has published his version of the story: https://matthewrevans.co.uk/what-happened-at-queen-mary/
(more…)Tag: restructuring
Arigato to Masaru Nakamoto
“This last man standing is Dr. Nakamoto” writes Caitlin Logan and certain memories make me shiver. I want to extend my hand and to stand firmly besides Dr. Nakamoto. For his story has not been told yet, beyond what Caitlin brings to light today. I wish to add two details, here.
Hong Kong University Student Union article on Matthew Evans
I provide translation of an article published by Jason Tsui in Undergrad, HKUSU. The views represented are not mine, however the overall sentiment of this article agrees with my personal view of what a bad idea it was for the University of Hong Kong to offer a position of responsibility to someone with a track-record in dismantling successful academic departments. The article mentions that 30 colleagues were fired by the application of Evans’ restructuring criteria. In reality, 11 members of staff were declared at risk of redundancy (I was one). Possibly there was confusion with parallel recruitment adverts for 30 staff during the sacking of their peers or with voluntary departures to better-managed institutions, which eventually have risen the number of departures to almost 40 (without including departures of new staff that joined the School after 2012). The author also appears to have misunderstood that Prof John Allen’s claim for unfair dismissal was successful. Matthew Evans’ vindictive behaviour against John Allen ammounted to breach of contract. My petition for John Allen’s reinstatement stands.
These are lies, Dicky, not misrepresentations
This is how Dicky Clymo, emeritus professor at Queen Mary University of London, came into my life. First, he taught me about iron pans in peatlands. Second, he taught me that calling someone who is conveying a false statement a liar has implications (difficult to know and/or prove) over a) the person’s knowledge of the truth, and b) the person’s intention to confuse, manipulate or cheat her audience. A polite gentleman, he advised me to use instead the phrase that X manager was misrepresenting Y or Z fact or opinion. (more…)
Recycling of bad managers is disastrous
I noticed visits to this blog from DailyNous “Serious Cuts and Stark Choices at Aberdeen“. I asked whether the former Science & Engineering Vice Principal at Queen Mary, Jeremy Kilburn, was repeating one of his destructive assaults against colleagues? At Queen Mary he convinced academics to strike; an act he repeated at the University of Aberdeen. Unfortunately, according to the BBC, it looks like Kilburn continues to call for academic sackings. I wish he fails and faces instead the sack himself. (more…)
Simon Gaskell quits Queen Mary
Simon Gaskell has announced with an email to all staff his retirement. This is good news for the College, although it will be challenging to find a successor to reverse such decline witnessed in the past few years. Together with the departures of Matthew Evans and Jeremy Kilburn, none of the culprits of the destruction of the School of Biological and Chemical Sciences remains in post. As I put it to Gaskell in November 2011:
Correspondence with Sir Nicholas Montagu
Dr C Magoulas v QMUL (part III)
If you need background to this dispute read first part I. For my general commentary on the case see ‘Academic position, age discrimination and social justice‘. If you would like to know how Queen Mary failed to follow its own Redeployment Procedure when dismissing Babis see part II. Here, I comment on three (of the four) final (summary) points in the Employment Appeal Tribunal Judgment (paragraphs 34-36). (more…)
Dr C Magoulas v QMUL (part II)
This post continues an account and critique of the EAT Judgment
“The Tribunal’s Decision on the Application for Reconsideration
21. The Claimant applied for a review. The ET refused that application because there was no reasonable prospect of the decision being varied or revoked. The application had been based on a “new finding of fact” in the decision of a different ET in a different case. The ET held that the new evidence would not probably have had an important influence on the outcome. That is not challenged on this appeal.”
Reading the above one may ask: what was the “new finding of fact”? And how come the ET [Employment Tribunal] held that the new evidence would not probably have had an important influence on the outcome? I pause to consider this issue. It relates to the failure of QMUL to enact its redeployment procedure as required by employment law in a redundancy situation. (more…)