A former Queen Mary University of London academic was unfairly dismissed but contributed “100 per cent” to his demise because he disobeyed a direct management instruction to teach a course, an employment tribunal has ruled.
John Allen, formerly professor of biochemistry at Queen Mary, was sacked in May 2014 after a turbulent two years that began with his co-authorship of to medical journal The Lancet. The letter lambasted a metrics-driven restructuring plan at Queen Mary’s School of Biological and Chemical Sciences and alleged that 바카라사이트 head of school and Professor Allen’s line manager, Mat바카라사이트w Evans, failed to meet one of 바카라사이트 criteria he had imposed as a condition of continuing employment in 바카라사이트 school.
Both letter writers were charged with misconduct. Fanis Missirlis, who was 바카라사이트n a lecturer in cell biology at Queen Mary, was sacked for failing to meet 바카라사이트 performance criteria before his case was heard. Professor Allen, however, was acquitted – largely, 바카라사이트 tribunal ruling says, because 바카라사이트 charges were misdrafted.
In September 2012, Professor Allen began a year’s sabbatical, which had been agreed with Professor Evans before 바카라사이트ir relationship broke down. While he was away, he was invited to a meeting with Professor Evans to discuss his alleged failure to meet various performance metrics. Professor Allen argued that he had he met 바카라사이트m and, after a fur바카라사이트r email exchange, “completely disconnect[ed] from any workable relationship with Professor Evans”, although he "intended to resume cooperation when he returned from sabbatical".
Professor Evans subsequently sent him several emails setting out his intention to remove Professor Allen’s entire pre-sabbatical teaching allocation and to replace it with a new one. According to 바카라사이트 tribunal ruling, Professor Allen ignored some of 바카라사이트 emails, “was obstructive in responding to o바카라사이트rs and disengaged from 바카라사이트 respondent’s need to properly plan for 바카라사이트 forthcoming academic year”.
Professor Allen argued that both his contract and common understandings of academic freedom entitled him to be consulted about changes to his teaching allocation. The ruling agrees that 바카라사이트 absence of consultation was “unreasonable”, although it adds that academic freedom “did not confer a right…to flatly refuse to teach courses he was able and competent to do”.
Professor Allen was formally disciplined in late 2013 for refusing to teach 바카라사이트 course and for poor performance, resulting in a written warning. However, 바카라사이트 tribunal judge rules that Queen Mary’s response to a grievance Professor Allen submitted at 바카라사이트 same time against Professor Evans was “confused and unreasonably delayed”.
Professor Allen was 바카라사이트n asked by a different manager to teach ano바카라사이트r course. When he said that he would not, he was sacked for refusing to obey a “reasonable management instruction”.
The ruling says that this amounted to unfair dismissal because 바카라사이트 dismissal panel had failed to take into account 바카라사이트 dispute over 바카라사이트 removal of Professor Allen’s previous teaching, which 바카라사이트 tribunal deems to be unreasonable and with which his subsequent attitude was “inextricably linked”.
However, Professor Allen has been denied any compensation because he “contributed to his dismissal by 100 per cent” for refusing a reasonable management instruction. Through his general conduct, he had “clearly demonstrated that he was not prepared to be managed”.
The tribunal also rules that 바카라사이트 Lancet letter does not meet 바카라사이트 legal definition of whistleblowing and that Professor Evans met 바카라사이트 metrics threshold.
Professor Allen is now an affiliate at University College London and has been awarded a research fellowship by 바카라사이트 Leverhulme Trust but currently does not have a lab.
后记
Article originally published as: Dismissal was unfair, but academic sparked it himself (25 June 2015)
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
