Gary Duke was accused of two things by the University of Salford - victimising two individuals and bringing the University into disrepute.
Here's what Gary has to say on both charges…
"I was accused of the victimisation, harassment and bullying of two individuals, Professor John Wilson and student and part-time member of staff Li Xiang. No evidence (evidential statement) was presented to me at the hearing of their complaints against me of victimisation, harassment or bullying.
Both refused to be called as witnesses to answer questions regarding the nature of the allegations made against me, and to the specific content contained within the newsletters that concerned them.
Michael Harloe and Martin Hall, although named within the Vice Consul's Newsletters, did not make charges of victimisation, bullying and harassment. Both were asked to appear as witnesses by me and both refused."
On bringing the University into disrepute…
"I was accused of bringing the university into disrepute through attacking senior management (Deans of Faculty for example) more generally. When I mentioned to the panel and the investigating officer Scott Mulholland who was present, that he had stated that management were fair targets for satire, he denied this. This was despite the fact that this was clearly stated within the minutes of the two investigatory meetings held prior to the disciplinary hearing, which were presented as evidence at the disciplinary hearing.
I was also accused of being 'responsible for the distribution of the newsletters throughout the university'. Again I asked if there was any evidence to show that I was directly responsible for the distribution of the newsletters throughout the university. They stated that there was no evidence, apart from the fact that I had authored the newsletters and passed them on to another person via electronic means. They suggested that as several newsletters appeared that I must have known that they would be distributed more widely."
On the University of Salford…
"The right to speak out publicly against corruption, profligacy, nepotism, bullying and victimisation, should be encouraged in a public institution such as Salford University. This will send out the opposite message.
There are no genuine mechanisms to deal with complaints or wider criticisms. Suspension of members of staff is being regularly used to silence any dissent or criticism. This is a terrible form of bullying.
As well as being suspended and sacked, management have also attacked my PhD which I was in the process of submitting. Management have taken away my right to earn a living teaching at Salford University. By suspending me as a student and attacking my PhD, they want to take away my right to earn a living as a lecturer in the future. This is particularly vindictive. It is also widely unpopular among staff and students at Salford.
Do I believe that this process and hearing will be unbiased? The fact that they advertised my position as lecturer in sociology in the School of Languages on the 17 July, seventeen days before my disciplinary hearing, and nineteen days before my dismissal, demonstrates that the whole process was a sham. What sort of employer puts someone through a stressful process like this knowing that the outcome is already determined? This is disgraceful.
My concern that the disciplinary hearing was being held over the summer holiday period when many staff were away (some of my own witnesses could not appear as they were on holiday) and would seriously affect the outcome, was also completely ignored. It's like the Moscow show trials but worse because it's carried out behind closed doors."
4:30pm 6th August 2009
The University has just given us this statement...
A part-time lecturer at the University of Salford has been dismissed from his post after admitting that he was the author of several newsletters defaming a number of his colleagues. His dismissal followed a disciplinary hearing at which he acknowledged that he had authored a series of newsletters which the University's Disciplinary Panel found to have contained malicious and personally damaging remarks and included personal attacks on a student and other members of the University
The Panel also found that he had distributed the newsletters and that this act was harassment and victimisation. It also brought the University into disrepute.
A spokesperson for the University said "A part-time lecturer has been dismissed from the University's employment because of actions that the Disciplinary Panel found had amounted to gross misconduct."
See previous article here…
9th December 2010: Latest Update click here