Incompatibility is not an academic question

HOW closely are British universities and the people who run them tied to the politics of state, or the interests of big business? How compatible are such ties, or the desire to cultivate them, with integrity and academic freedom?

We recently reported the case of Hisham Yezza, a former PhD student turned employee of the University of Nottingham, who found himself detained and facing deportation to Algeria, as a result of being too helpful to an MA student at the university with a "terrorist" document he had downloaded for his dissertation. Someone saw it on Hisham's computer, and though the document was available from official US websites and elsewhere, the university authorities did not ask their employee what it was, they simply called the police.

Hisham and the student were arrested by armed police acting under the Terrorism Act. Their homes were raided, and though they were both eventually cleared of any charges, Hisham was re-arrested because his visa had not been renewed, and he was carted away to Colnbrook detention centre, near Heathrow. Last thing I heard he had been moved again, maybe to avoid demonstrations. There is a campaign on Hisham's behalf, with support from students, former colleagues, and Nottingham MP Alan Simpson. But the University, justifying its initial decision to call in police said there was no threat to academic freedom involved, because though Hisham had studied at the university he was only a member of clerical staff.

Dr. Rhetta Moran was never charged with any offence, nor could she be deported, but she was sacked by the University of Salford in 2005, for what appeared to be political reasons, even if her university bosses seem to have been unable to decide whether she had done anything wrong or if she was simply being made "redundant". The closest they came to spelling out a reason was to say her research was not "compatible" with the university's aims.

On March 28, 2004 the Observer ran a story about women asylum seekers who had gone 'underground' because of harassment and fear in Salford. Rhetta Moran was quoted as s source, saying that asylum seekers had been dumped in poor estates, without any provision for extra services or adequate legal access. With local people already short of resources, this had resulted in tensions. Dr. Moran had previously exposed how Iraqi asylum seekers were being deported. Soon after the Observer article appeared she was removed from her post with a government-funded research project on the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers. Next came the moves from the University.

Rhetta fought to be reinstated, taking her case to the employment tribunal, with support from the National Union of Journalists. She was unsuccessful. Salford University even tried to obtain £10,000 in costs, which would have served as a deterrent to other sacked employees seeking justice from the tribunals. But where was the Association of University Teachers, now the University and Colleges Union(UCU), and its president Sally Hunt, in all this?

Rhetta Moran has discovered that Mike Burrows, chief executive of Salford Primary Care Trust, wrote to her boss at the university, Professor Michael Harloe, in April 2004, shortly after the Observer article, to tell him that she was being removed from the refugee research project. Then in January 2005, the day after she was sacked by the university, the deputy PM's office announced a multi-million regeneration scheme for central Salford, in which Prof. Harloe, Salford's vice chancellor, would play a major part. ( Incidentally, I hear the "regeneration" in parts of Salford is becoming a dirty word, as the developers move in, and working people who cannot afford the new properties in their old neighborhood are forced to move out. But that is another story.)

It turns out that John Dobson, head of Salford's business school, who signed Rhetta Moran's letter of dismissal, telling her that her research was no longer "compatible", has become president of the Salford University UCU branch.

Now Rhetta Moran, having had time to spend with her family and pursue her own research, has written to Sally Hunt, with support from a Sheffield University academic, Dr.Aubrey Blumsohn, whose particular interest has been scientific misconduct, but is also concerned with academic bullying. They recall that Sally Hunt wrote on September 28, 2005, to say that she was asking for a report on what happened to Rhetta Moran, but say they are still waiting to hear from her. They are concerned not just with this case, but with what UCU's general position
is on so-called "incompatibility", and how it affects academic freedom and integrity. They think this is a major issue for the union, and for all involved in higher education and research. I think they are right. .

Here is some background material which Aubrey Blumsohn has been kind enough to send me:


Part 1: A story and statement from Rhetta Moran

http://scientific-misconduct.blogspot.com/2008/07/rhetta-moran-david-healy-and-language.html

Part 2: Letter of this week to Sally Hunt from Rhetta and myself

A Letter to sally Hunt (Moran/Blumsohn)

part 3: The cartoon version

the cartoon version

Rhetta gets a result

FRIENDS supporting Rhetta Moran (Socialist Workers photograph).

IT is nice to report that one of the people we have championed in this blog has got a favourable result. On Thursday last week I told how Dr.Rhetta Moran, who despite our support had failed to be re-instated by the University of Salford, was having to go back to the tribunal to oppose a bid by her former employers for costs.

I was concerned both for the effect on Dr.Moran if she lost and for the message that might go out to others who considered themselves victimised by an employer, that if they dared exercise their right to an employment tribunal and lost, they could find themselves penalised.

Brent Trades Union Council in north-west London authorised me to protest to Salford. In reply the university vice chancellor Michael Harloe wrote that because Rhetta Moran had put up such "unprecedented" opposition, cross-examining witnesses, and so forth, "the case was inordinately long and costly".

"Dr Moran’s litigation against the University has diverted scarce resources which otherwise would have served the University’s education mission. As we are substantially publicly funded, the University is obliged to recover costs under these circumstances. Our relatively modest application for costs is subject to the judgement of the Tribunal".

Today however I received a thankyou note which has gone out to supporters, saying the Employment Tribunal "unanimously decided against awarding costs against Dr Rhetta Moran so as not to put people off representing themselves at tribunal".

"Supporters of Dr Rhetta Moran petitioned the University of Salford through its Vice Chancellor Micheal Harloe urging him to use his power and drop the University's application that Rhetta pay costs for the Employment Tribunal.

The pleas, in their hundreds, fell on deaf ears and the University went back to court, continuing the claim for costs.

They lost.

"The University's expensive barrister and solicitors were in attendance, along with several senior managers, to argue for up to £10, 000 in costs from Dr Moran who had represented herself throughout the case.

"The tribunal chair said that it was the Employment Tribunal's ethos to ensure individuals felt they could represent themselves at tribunal. The Tribunal decided unanimously that they would not allow costs to be claimed and reference was made to a "David and Goliath" scenario.

"The campaign had been organised by the NUJ with General Secretary Jeremy Dear describing the University's actions as "unjust and unfair", expressing concerns at victimising workers who had lost their jobs and then used their legal rights to attend Employment Tribunal.

"Rhetta Moran and her campaigners are very grateful for the incredible support that has been shown".

And we should be grateful for the fight she has put up. Even if Rhetta did not succeed in getting her job back she has given the authorities something to think about, and prevented what could have been a nasty precedent for working people, too.

• ON a personal note, I am pleased to say I got another result today, a request from organisers of the anti-Norman Finkelstein petition that I tell them where my name appeared so they could remove it, as I requested. If anyone else out there still finds their name misused in this way I hope they will feel encouraged to complain too.

Salford Vicious!

DR.RHETTA MORAN, whose research into what was really happening to asylum seekers was widely acclaimed, but must have annoyed the government, and thus perhaps embarrassed her employers, the University of Salford, will face a tribunal hearing tomorrow.

She has already lost her job, and was unable to obtain re-instatement from the tribunal, despite backing from her union, the National Union of Journalists (NUJ), and from other trades unionists.

But now she is being pursued for legal costs of up to £10,000 by Salford University. NUJ general secretary Jeremy Dear says the university's actions are "unjust and unfair". But Prof Michael Harloe, Salford's vice-chancellor, says: "Dr Moran's litigation has diverted scarce resources. As we are substantially publicly funded, the university is obliged to recover costs under these circumstances."
Expert faces £10,000 legal bill, Neal Keeling, Manchester Evening News.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/education/s/1005/1005241_expert_faces_10000_legal_bill.html

Obliged to whom? The research project on which Rhetta Moran worked was government funded. Why was it so necessary to make her "redundant"? And who decided that the university had to spend so much money fighting the case?

Rhetta Moran has provided a public service by bringing out the truth about an issue on which media and government often tell lies. She has helped highly vulnerable individuals who would otherwise have been left to suffer unseen. If Salford University were dedicated to light and truth it would have valued her work and example to students.

Instead the university has prevented her continuing the work, thus perhaps ingratiating itself with the powers that be but doing little to enhance its good name. If it now proceeds with its claim, and succeeds, Dr.Moran will not only be out of a job, as she has been for three years, but saddled with a heavy bill.

Jeremy Dear condemns the university's 'vindictive actions' in trying to recover costs. As he says: "The university is seeking to penalise someone who believes they were wrongly removed from their job."

For employers and employees throughout the land the message that will go out if Salford succeeds in this vindictive action is "Anyone who dares try to defend themselves and their job by going through the procedures is liable to find themselves victimised not just once, but twice, punished for trying to fight their case.

It's vicious!

You can write to Professor Michael Harloe at m.harloe@salford.ac.uk,
urging that the university drops its claim,
and cc your e-mail to rhettamorancampaign@googlemail.com

You can also sign a petition at
http://petitions.com/petition/rhettamorancampaign/index.html

Dirty Work by the Irwell?

Salford University
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk

from video, Rhetta Moran on Asylum, by Chris Edwards,
http://www.filmmakersagainstwar.org/index2.htm

SALFORD, the city where I grew up, inspired Ewan McColl's song Dirty Old Town. A city of factories, mills, docks and a mine. They've cleaned it up a bit now, the colliery shut 15 years ago, and the docks are empty but have a marina. Reflecting the social changes there's a new young offenders' institution and prison, HMP Forest Bank, where Agecroft power station used to be.

Salford Tech, as once was, is a University now by the banks of the Irwell. Is someone there doing dirty work for the government?

Dr Rhetta Moran is an internationally recognised researcher on refugee issues, and a member of the National Union of Journalists. In 2002 she took up the case of Abdullah Rahmatullah, an Afghan refugee from the Taliban who had become a leader in his community. Rahmatullah was ‘arrested’ without warning when he reported to a Salford asylum seekers’ centre, and held at Manchester airport before being sent to the Harmonsworth Detention Centre near Heathrow

From there he was deported to Austria, on the grounds that he had stopped a few hours there on his way to Britain. Dr.Moran discovered he was being held at a remote camp near Austria's mountain border with Italy. This is how the British and other western governments are "batting for freedom", as Mrs.T used to put it when talking about Afghanistan.

Since Spring 2004, Rhetta has been battling to defend herself and her research against her employer, the University of Salford. Her colleagues, students, union and supporters believe she was targeted for the sack because she exposed how UK government policy was making people destitute.

Her research led to a Guardian article exposing how the British government was rejecting asylum claims from Iraqi men, telling them to leave this country and return to Saddam Hussein's Iraq, at the same time as Britain was finalising plans to bomb their country.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,4629565-103550,00.html

A year later, on Sunday March 28, 2004, the Observer carried an article on how young asylum-seeking women were having to go underground, living in permanent fear in Salford. It drew on work and contacts provided by Rhetta Moran.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,4889962-102285,00.html
Soon after this Rhetta was removed from her leadership of the £600,000 Salford RAPAR SRB5 research project about asylum issues. RAPAR, Refugee and Asylum Seeker Participation and Research, although in the "voluntary sector", is funded by government. Rhetta's union colleagues believe her work on the plight of asylum seekers in the north of England proved uncomfortable for the political establishment (Observer, 12 February 2006).

Within a month, the University of Salford wrote to Dr.Moran telling her that her research was not "compatible" and that her contract would not be renewed. An employment tribunal panel that is hearing her case has sat for 23 days so far. The university is insisting that Rhetta was dismissed because she was 'redundant'. But issues exposed in the courtroom so far include:·

• Rhetta's professorial line manager says she is one of the best researchers he has ever worked with
• · Within two weeks of sacking her, university bosses handed a £192,316 research grant from the European Social Fund which Rhetta had secured to a male researcher in the university and, when he could not deliver it because he did not have her networks and expertise, they sent the money back to Europe
• Many of Rhetta's postgraduate students were left without any supervision for at least one year.

Jeremy Dear, general secretary of the National Union of Journalists, urging supporters to attend the ongoing hearings which re-open this week, says "This case is about academic freedom and human rights: "the rights of researchers to do their research and to communicate their findings about human rights abuses without interference and the responsibilities of universities and governments to protect these rights".

You can send email messages of support for Rhetta's continuing struggle to manchesternuj@nuj.org.uk with copies to rhetta.moran@ntlworld.com

Incidentally, supporters of an academic boycott of Israeli institutions point to their involvment with the state and occupation. Opponents protest that the boycott infringes upon "academic freedom". Perhaps both sides can unite in condemning what appears to be happening in Salford?

My own trades union council, like many others, does not meet in August, but our Secretary has been in touch proposing that we send a message of support to Rhetta Moran. I'm sure there will be lots more.