The director of the University of Cambridge's prestigious Institute of Astronomy acted in a ‘wicked’ way by trying to blame other professors for the ‘stress and anxiety’ suffered by a woman colleague, an employment tribunal heard today.
The accusation about Professor Richard McMahon was aired amid an extraordinary dispute in which the institute, a leader in research into the evolution of the universe and formation of the solar system, has been accused of a 'bad history of misogyny'.
The case dates back to July 2021, when Professor Wyn Evans submitted formal whistleblowing disclosures following the treatment of a female colleague, Dr Gudrun Tausch-Pebody.
She had been sent an 'end of contract notice' the previous month, which she has likened to 'psychological torture'.
Prof Evans, an expert in astrophysics, claimed Dr Tausch-Pebody, who joined the institute in 2012 as a European Commission contracts manager, was being deliberately undermined by Professor McMahon as there was funding available to protect her role.
He went on to claim the institute had a 'bad history of misogyny' and a 'cycle of bullying'.
One woman in the department had been 'hounded out of a job', another had been 'left a frightened woman' and a third had endured 'aggressive professors', he alleged.
The tribunal in Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, has been told that instead of trying to protect Dr Tausch-Pebody, Prof McMahon raised grievances against Prof Evans and two colleagues, professors Gerry Gilmore and Martin Haehnelt.
Professor Richard McMahon, the director of the University of Cambridge's prestigious Institute of Astronomy, was accused of acting in a ‘wicked’ way by trying to blame other professors for the ‘stress and anxiety’ suffered by a woman colleague
He accused Prof Gilmore of ‘unprofessional, bullying and undermining behaviour’ towards him by falsifying draft and unconfirmed minutes of a meeting and encouraging Dr Tausch-Pebody to challenge or ignore the institute’s policies.
Prof McMahon added in his formal submission that he felt ‘mobbed’ by all three professors making complaints about him.
Professors Haehnelt and Evans had used ‘the stress and anxiety caused to Tausch-Pebody to claim that I had behaved inappropriately’, he added.
During the hearing today, Stuart Brittenden KC, representing Prof Evans, told McMahon: ‘You have just advanced the most wicked allegation without any evidence to support it.’
Prof McMahon answered: ‘That’s not correct’.
Mr Brittenden also accused him of inventing evidence to blame the other three professors for Dr Tausch-Pebody’s ill health, saying: ‘The only reason you made that allegation was to deflect criticism away from you. That’s right isn’t it?’
Prof McMahon denied the allegation and insisted he was following legal processes in his role as department head.
The university took almost two years to dismiss Prof McMahon's allegations against the professors and no evidence had been submitted in support of his claim, the hearing was told.
Colleague Professor Wyn Evans has brought the tribunal on the grounds he suffered detrimental treatment as a result of whistleblowing
Prof Evans - who last year applied to become the University of Cambridge's chancellor on an anti-bullying manifesto - later launched separate legal proceedings against Prof McMahon, claiming his grievance allegations were defamatory.
The case was settled out of court following a 2023 judgment which concluded Prof McMahon’s comments had defamed his colleague.
Prof Evans has brought the tribunal on the grounds he suffered detrimental treatment as a result of whistleblowing.
The university denies his claims and accuses him of a vendetta against Prof McMahon - a claim in turn denied by Prof Evans.
Prof McMahon, who the tribunal was told is suffering from PTSD and is having mental health difficulties, appeared close to tears as he blamed the wording in his grievance on his B grade in GCSE English at his school in Northern Ireland.
He also denied being in an agitated state when he made his grievance.
‘It was an emotional response. This (their) behaviour was a black and white breach of the policy,' he said today.
'All these people had to do was apologise and we could have moved on long ago. This is an unbelievable waste of the court’s time and taxpayers money.’
The dispute originated with the alleged treatment of Dr Gudrun Tausch-Pebody, who was sent 'end of contract notice', the hearing was told
There were breaks in the hearing to allow Prof McMahon to compose himself and Prof Evans agreed to stay out of the court room while Prof McMahon was giving evidence to avoid putting pressure on him.
Prof McMahon added: ‘This stuff has been going on for four years. My wife has been traumatised.
'We were sent the defamation order to our home address… You have no idea how this has hurt me.'
He admitted talking about confidential staff matters to some close colleagues but added: ‘In my opinion I had been bullied and I don’t think it unreasonable to tell close colleagues… There was nothing malicious intended by doing this.’
Mr Brittenden also asked why he could not just have had ‘a quiet word’ with Prof Evans instead of launching his grievance.
Prof McMahon replied: ‘It was in my opinion a breach of the dignity and work policy. For me, it was black and white.’
Prof Evans said in his evidence: ‘It is unprecedented in Cambridge University for a head of department to make a grievance against three professors simultaneously’.
In a written submission, Dr Tausch-Pebody has expressed her gratitude to Prof Evans for his ‘courage’ in intervening to protect her from alleged bullying.
The institute researches the evolution of the universe and formation of the solar system
She stated that his concern for her was based on her distress and him seeing a pattern of repeated and seemingly tolerated mistreatment of female members of the administrative staff at the institute.
A university spokesman has said it 'strongly rejects these claims and is vigorously defending this case'.
The tribunal continues
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。