Hell hath no fury like an academic suspended

Suspension is a legal and emotional minefield that can blow up in managers’ faces, says a wrongfully suspended scholar 

February 8, 2018
Guernica

Once, I had a flourishing career in higher education. I had just been promoted to associate professor and was feeling that all the years of hard work were starting to pay off. But these days, I just have a job – and one that I don’t really want any more.

How could this have happened? Did my computer self-destruct, taking with it years of research? Did an undergraduate take out my eye with a well-aimed paper dart during a particularly heavy Friday-afternoon lecture?

No. Reader, I was suspended.

I’m now back at work because, well, I didn’t do anything wrong. But it took the management four months to admit that. And there is so much that I want to get off my chest.

I’m talking to you, Professor Neoliberal Manager. I want you to understand that if you suspend academics, you are destroying their careers in small or large measure. They may regain their academic spirit somehow, somewhere, but the damage to their faith in universities will be terminal. Academics are proud creatures who don’t take kindly to attempts to annihilate them with a steady stream of official letters.

Perhaps you don’t care. But you should be careful, because they will be forever out to screw you over (preferably before they leave, but that’s just a detail). They will take every opportunity to bad-mouth your institution in general and you in particular. Even if you gag them with large amounts of banknotes, they will never again trust the colleagues who spoke ill of them in your little investigation. The saintly among them will forgive just one person – the one they most need. Everyone else will be dead to them.

Moreover, your lust for control opens you up to lawsuits. I am now knee-deep in knowledge of UK employment law and disciplinary procedures. I know what I’m talking about because of the leisure you gave me. I have a folder on my computer containing all the university policies – it’s right next to another one labelled “bullying”.

Your best hope is that the academic you suspended doesn’t have the money to hire a lawyer. But even without legal help, many will mount a case against you just for the buzz of seeing you wince when they wheel out Agoreyo v London Borough of Lambeth: the landmark 2017 case that makes it clear that suspending a professional, such as a teacher, medic or academic, can inflict particular damage on their careers, thus obliging their employers to tread particularly carefully.

Employers may be able to stretch their employees on a rack of processes provided that the rack appears status-blind. But put one foot wrong and you will be facing a tribunal. It might be for discrimination by virtue of characteristic or perception of characteristic. It might be for faults in your process. But whatever it is, it will cost your institution a lot to defend. Your vice-chancellor won’t like it. It will come up at your next appraisal.

Even those academics who use their unexpected leisure time to walk in the hills, admiring daffodils, will make your life very uncomfortable when they return. They will demand a face-to-face meeting and will hold you morally accountable for the harms you have enacted under a guise of “neutrality”. You may plead, in your defence, that you were just doing your job. But we’ve heard that one before. You abused your power. You had alternatives. You could have talked to the person you suspended to get to the truth, instead of wielding your power to cast them into limbo. Now you are stuck with someone who hates your guts.

My union representatives tell me that academic “disappearances” are becoming increasingly common across the UK, as the screw is turned ever tighter by the research excellence framework and now, God help us, the teaching excellence framework, too. Perhaps the suspended are in some ways the lucky ones. After all, ceasing to believe in universities as righteous, magnanimous or fair is to wake up to the world as it is. It is a decisive learning curve that may set its recipients free of a bad dependence on a fantasy. Perhaps it will even improve their scholarship. But their indignation and horror will always remain.

The author is an academic at a UK university. 

Please login or register to read this article

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Reader's comments (5)

Hell hath no fury like a professional de-professionalised by ambitious managerial neoliberal corporate robotic order followers. The bitten bite back. But does the public actually care a jot? No. And so the tyranny of rules and ever new target setting goes on. That is how corporations work. And our universities are corporations now. It is a very new phenomenon that many of our aggrieved academics really do feel they have lost their profession and now just have jobs. How that will play out remains to be seen.
Vice chancellors who suspend staff, impose ‘voluntary’ redundancies, and/or close departments should be dropped from Universities UK, and named in the Higher. The refusal of the Higher to list such universities is a craven surrender to the world of senior management, failed BP staff do not deserve such protection. Every student has the right to know quite how badly their university is run, how many staff are on zero hours contracts, and how many departments have been closed.
Of course I sympathise with your predicament and can appreciate how angry and bitter you must feel about how you have been treated. However, I have to say that my own experience of academia is one where more often than not academics are not held to account for their poor behaviour, whether that is poor supervision of PhDs, bullying of support staff or selectively ignoring rules which are put in place to make sure it's not just who you know. These are a minority, of course and I don't doubt that there is also a minority of trigger happy senior managers but there are definitely circumstances I know of where academic staff have been protected to the detriment of their students and others.
I think we must be assured that in this case the person who was 'bitten' here was given no chance. For whatever reason they offended but they sure as hell sound held to account for their offensiveness! I just don't like the way it was done. It sounds violent. Distasteful to say the least. Has anyone out there heard of fair and decent, humane conversation? This sounds like some kind of burning at the stake. Abhorrent that a so-called university could function that way and be within the law. I hope they aren't.
"But these days, I just have a job – and one that I don’t really want any more." "I'm going to hold onto it, even though I don't want it" sounds like a dog in the manger.

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments