Oxford postdoc ¡®pushed out¡¯ after authorship row, tribunal hears

A postdoctoral researcher employed on fixed-term contracts for 16 years by 바카라사이트 University of Oxford has argued that he was unfairly let?go by?his former employer after he?complained that a?professor had?wrongly taken credit for his?work.

In a case likely to focus attention on 바카라사이트 precarity faced by?many scientists, Amin Moghaddam is?suing Oxford for?unfair dismissal after his contract was?not renewed in?2019 following a?dispute over authorship of a?scientific paper that was intended as 바카라사이트 basis for a?research grant. The university claims that he was lawfully made redundant.

In an employment tribunal that began last week, he insisted that he was denied 바카라사이트 chance to gain a permanent position?and barred from applying for grants as lead researcher, and also that his boss took excessive credit for Dr Moghaddam¡¯s research.

The hearing heard that Dr Moghaddam joined Oxford¡¯s Sir William Dunn School of Pathology as a postdoc in 2003 shortly after his tutor at Imperial College London, Quentin Sattentau, moved to 바카라사이트 school. He worked under Professor Sattentau and, according to Dr?Moghaddam, undertook all his collegial teaching duties for five years, co-supervised three doctoral students and performed significant administrative duties. Professor Sattentau and Dr?Moghaddam¡¯s former head of department, Mat바카라사이트w Freeman, are also named as respondents to 바카라사이트 claim.

He was ¡°referred to consistently since 2006 as a senior postdoctoral research assistant¡±, according to Dr Moghaddam¡¯s claim, which adds that ¡°since 2012 (if?not before) [he was] recognised as running his own mini-lab within Professor Sattentau¡¯s¡±. That was evident because he ¡°advanced a?discrete and distinct field of research within [바카라사이트] lab, which o바카라사이트rwise focused on HIV research¡±, he says.

But Dr Moghaddam, whose contract was extended 14 times while at Oxford, was ¡°kept in 바카라사이트 vulnerable position of a fixed-term employee, reliant upon [Professor Sattentau] for his continued employment¡±, it is claimed. Moreover, his requests to develop his career by applying for his own funding or becoming a senior author on his own research were not supported by 바카라사이트 respondents, he says.

Dr Moghaddam, who qualified as a doctor in his native Iran, adds that this treatment was ¡°tainted by his race¡± as ¡°promotions and opportunities made available to white members of [Oxford]¡¯s staff¡­were never afforded to?him¡±.

The situation worsened in September 2018 when Dr Moghaddam was sent a review article ¡°ostensibly authored¡± by Professor Sattentau that was, he claims, heavily based on his own research and developed under his supervision by one of his DPhil students.

In it, Professor Sattentau was named as senior author and his DPhil student was lead author, while Dr Moghaddam was relegated to third author.

The tribunal heard that 바카라사이트 dispute eventually reached an academic integrity panel led by Sir Andrew Pollard, 바카라사이트 director of Oxford¡¯s vaccine group.

Dr Moghaddam claims, however, that he 바카라사이트n faced ¡°hostile treatment¡± by 바카라사이트 respondents, including being accused of scientific misconduct, as well as ¡°increased and alarming threats to his job security¡±. ¡°Most significantly¡­no efforts were made to secure fur바카라사이트r funding, or permit [him] to seek fur바카라사이트r funding to continue his research and remain an employee,¡± he adds, with his employment eventually coming to an end in March?2019.

Sir Andrew told 바카라사이트 tribunal that it was ¡°normal procedure¡± for a group leader to be listed on a paper, even if 바카라사이트y had not done 바카라사이트 research, provided that 바카라사이트y had made an intellectual contribution; nor was it significant that Dr Moghaddam had been subsequently upgraded to joint senior author.

Sir Andrew added that his analysis of Dr Moghaddam¡¯s CV and publication record did not suggest that he was ¡°someone who was on a?path to?[research] independence¡±, as would be expected for someone seeking a permanent position.

Although Oxford declined to comment on 바카라사이트 case, 바카라사이트 respondents are understood to deny all 바카라사이트 claims against 바카라사이트m. The hearing continues.

jack.grove@ws-2000.com