Re:Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark...
by orasis on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @01:01PM
(#17811433)
Will someone please legally define "bullying" and "abusive"? This seems like another kangaroo court system in the making.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark...
by oh_sigh on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @01:09PM
(#17811527)
Considering this had nothing to do with the legal system there is no need to definition these terms legally here.
Re:Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark...
by shaggerty on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @01:15PM
(#17811601)
The article links to another article discussing Wellcome's policy.
"The policy defines bullying as a misuse of power that can make people feel vulnerable, upset, humiliated, undermined or threatened. It says harassment is unwanted physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct that has the purpose or effect of violating someone else’s dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them."
Re:Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark...
by Avamander on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @05:15PM
(#17813919)
How can we be sure it wasn't just a few disgruntled people who wanted to just put a spoke in her wheel?
Re:Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark...
by HarryHirsch on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @06:28PM
(#17814426)
From the article: After receiving a complaint in November, it immediately commissioned an independent investigation by a law firm into the allegations. The intention was to establish whether the allegations were substantiated by evidence — rather than to determine a disciplinary outcome.
ICR were playing by the letter of the law - as they ought to - and sound properly contrite. There must have been a lot of substance.