This is an excellent reaction to the absolutely outrageous actions of numerous scholar-activists, cowardly and incompetent administrators, and a venal faculty association. Two small quibbles - I also "won" on the suspension grievance (reduced to a "letter of reprimand") and the Canadian Association of University Teachers is appealing the lack of reinstatement. There is no reason to reject reinstatement except to reward crybullies, and so I will accept nothing less.
Frances, your treatment by MRU was clearly unjust. I read the majority of the legal case, and was astonished at how MRU did not appear to mitigate damages and seemed instead quite focused on the severest of sanctions, that being termination. MRU seemed more concerned about their reputation, than yours. I agree that being reinstated would be the proper course of action, and sincerely hope that happens, which would the greatest of all vindications. I am also stunned at what clearly would be immense legal fees for all parties involved, which could have been avoided if MRU did not bend a knee to these activist types, and had more open dialogue. Also of note is that MRU had no policy on social media of its employees and only changed it to deal with your case. Good luck, you are a great inspiration to all who have internal honey badgers waiting to make their debut ! Cheers.
Thank you for your bravery and congratulations on your overdue vindication! You help so many others find their voices and the courage to go on. Keep up the good fight!
Hmm, I wonder whether there are any other issues on which the consensus of right-minded people, inside and outside the academy, might also be completely wrong? Gender Ideology, I'm looking at you.
I am a heartless piece of poo. I never didn't believe it, but I didn't swallow the news hook, line and sinker either. I didn't pay much attention frankly, and since about 2018 don't trust pretty much anything the North American MSM ever says. Love Terry Glavin's work on this, and and I love Frances, she is a genuine Canadian hero. Grave Error, which I am half-way through, is required reading for all Canadians. I am considering making a delegation to the OCDSB school board this year to promote the book. Whether or not they would allow a heartless piece of poo do make such a delegation remains an open question.
I did believe it, and shed tears over it. I’ve been stunned by what I have read since. It goes to show that expertise really does matter. If, like Frances, you already knew the backstory on Kevin Annett or like some of the archaeologist whistleblowers you knew the site had been partially excavated before, you were in a much better position to realize it was important to ask follow up questions (and which follow up question to ask).
Expertise matters, yes, but just as observer, I am inherently skeptical, and its part of my nature as an applied scientist. I think all people, especially on matters related to this subject, need to adopt the motto of The Royal Society - Nullius In Verba - Don't take their word for it (i.e. demand proof before accepting assertions).
Painted in this way academics sound like petulant teenagers who both demand complete freedom simultaneously with expecting full dependency on parents anytime that would be more advantageous.
There is a great origin-story in Anglo-Saxon academic tradition, when a hostile political environment spurred the exodus from Oxford to found that other grand institution. Some inklings of this are already happening with UATX, DocStock is onboard. If consistently finding truth is a sound principle then over the long term graduates from such institutions should be in greater demand from employers and therefore sway institutions toward evidentiary-based subject matter. Of course that will depend on truth bringing greater career rewards over DEI conformity.
This is an excellent reaction to the absolutely outrageous actions of numerous scholar-activists, cowardly and incompetent administrators, and a venal faculty association. Two small quibbles - I also "won" on the suspension grievance (reduced to a "letter of reprimand") and the Canadian Association of University Teachers is appealing the lack of reinstatement. There is no reason to reject reinstatement except to reward crybullies, and so I will accept nothing less.
Both those corrections are EXCELLENT news! Thanks Frances!
Frances, your treatment by MRU was clearly unjust. I read the majority of the legal case, and was astonished at how MRU did not appear to mitigate damages and seemed instead quite focused on the severest of sanctions, that being termination. MRU seemed more concerned about their reputation, than yours. I agree that being reinstated would be the proper course of action, and sincerely hope that happens, which would the greatest of all vindications. I am also stunned at what clearly would be immense legal fees for all parties involved, which could have been avoided if MRU did not bend a knee to these activist types, and had more open dialogue. Also of note is that MRU had no policy on social media of its employees and only changed it to deal with your case. Good luck, you are a great inspiration to all who have internal honey badgers waiting to make their debut ! Cheers.
Thank you for your bravery and congratulations on your overdue vindication! You help so many others find their voices and the courage to go on. Keep up the good fight!
Frances, that's excellent news and I agree, reinstatement is the only way to go!
Love you Frances, good luck with a decent settlement.
Hmm, I wonder whether there are any other issues on which the consensus of right-minded people, inside and outside the academy, might also be completely wrong? Gender Ideology, I'm looking at you.
lol me too
Kathleen, what a wonderful essay on the mess MRU has created over the Widdowson debacle. Hopefully MRU comes to its senses and does the right thing.
Excellent analysis. I love how you incorporate how things used to be before academic independence.
Bravo, Kathleen. This is powerful writing, both informative and entertaining. I'll be looking for ways to share this.
many thanks Joan!
Thank you
I am a heartless piece of poo. I never didn't believe it, but I didn't swallow the news hook, line and sinker either. I didn't pay much attention frankly, and since about 2018 don't trust pretty much anything the North American MSM ever says. Love Terry Glavin's work on this, and and I love Frances, she is a genuine Canadian hero. Grave Error, which I am half-way through, is required reading for all Canadians. I am considering making a delegation to the OCDSB school board this year to promote the book. Whether or not they would allow a heartless piece of poo do make such a delegation remains an open question.
WWAHPPD?
I did believe it, and shed tears over it. I’ve been stunned by what I have read since. It goes to show that expertise really does matter. If, like Frances, you already knew the backstory on Kevin Annett or like some of the archaeologist whistleblowers you knew the site had been partially excavated before, you were in a much better position to realize it was important to ask follow up questions (and which follow up question to ask).
Expertise matters, yes, but just as observer, I am inherently skeptical, and its part of my nature as an applied scientist. I think all people, especially on matters related to this subject, need to adopt the motto of The Royal Society - Nullius In Verba - Don't take their word for it (i.e. demand proof before accepting assertions).
Please also promote the book to the OCSB!
Painted in this way academics sound like petulant teenagers who both demand complete freedom simultaneously with expecting full dependency on parents anytime that would be more advantageous.
There is a great origin-story in Anglo-Saxon academic tradition, when a hostile political environment spurred the exodus from Oxford to found that other grand institution. Some inklings of this are already happening with UATX, DocStock is onboard. If consistently finding truth is a sound principle then over the long term graduates from such institutions should be in greater demand from employers and therefore sway institutions toward evidentiary-based subject matter. Of course that will depend on truth bringing greater career rewards over DEI conformity.
Thank you.