The Supreme court; Academics, Businessmen, and Soccer players

The sheer brute fact of having a country's Supreme court adjudicate on a routine personnel matter is eloquent testimony to a management gone wild, as to a “union” simply gone. We convened yesterday with fully 10 legal staff (6 on Cox's side) and three judges – Geoghegan, Denham, and (worryingly, given her rightwing reputation) Macken. All of this will eventually be paid for by the taxpayer, as will the loss of about 5 years of a great Irish scientist's career. Due to respectively their business and academic experience (Wellcome and TCD), Macken and Denham both offered to recuse themselves; this was turned down.

As the jumped-up little KKH ( a cork reference) Sreenan began to speak, it was clear that we were in for no great surprise. From my point of view, I wondered that such little non-entities should be allowed to trifle with the lives of those of us who are attempting to drive Ireland's science and culture forward. Yet, even given my low expectations, the crudity of the Cox case was stunning. Tenure was simply 3 months. End of story; Geoghegan continued to pick this apart. Tenure had to be more, he argued, and there were no procedures used here. Macken agreed. Eventually, Denham chimed in. 3 month's notice was the end of academic freedom, she said from the chair.

Sreenan continued to whine away (“oidentifoy” as identify etc). The 1997 act was to “Ketch” DCU and other Irish unis and bring them into a 21st century business environment. It was at this point that Macken's increasingly strong contribution started. No business VP would take a job that allowed 3 month's notice without cause, she argued, her demeanor increasingly angry. But soccer players would! - said Sreenan, deep in Boucicault territory. They take 5 year contracts and get let go, all the time. The “tenure” part of the case was over, and Clarke will be upheld.

Now for procedures. There were none, and the judges showed sophistication in distinguishing the application of the coup de grace at the end of a procedure and the procedure itself. Clarke will be upheld here as well.

Finally, remedies or - What was Mella Carroll doing in DCU? It turns out that she ruled in Sheehy versus Ryan that those of you who do not have an explicit “Tenure means work till 65” section in your contracts are not really permanent. It also became clear that Cox are fully aware that the EAT in my case should not be taking place. The Garvey case was cited for how DCU must fully reinstate Paul, despite their expressed wish to sack him immediately even when they lose this case. They were also castigated for not giving him facilities to work.

My friends, this is a scandal.


Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 30u Meitheamh 2000

The students speak (III)

There has been no further communication from DCU to this ex-student since 2003, who obviously needs closure for the sake of his well-being and to get on with his life. He has been promised a reply, and it has been delayed nearly 7 years.

I shall comment further on this anon; in the meantime, anyone who believes my judgement of P. was harsh might take a look at the behaviour below





























































Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 20u Meitheamh 2000

The students speak (II)

So far there is an account of a meeting, at which unspeakable breaches of "duty of care" are implemented by management in order to secure a case against a staff member. Today let's look at

1. The class rep's view of events. As it happened, he was at the meeting.

2. The further pressure put on two students, as described in yesterday's post. Had they done what was asked, and agreed to incriminate me, no doubt DCU management would have done them a few favours. No-one should send their kids to DCU until the rule of law is established there.

If anyone from outside Ireland who reads this wonders why no criminal charges have been filed, it is because that this behavior reflects a powerful criminal interest group within Irish society. We did get the case brought up, repeatedly, in parliament. The answer was that this sort of behavior is no-one's business except management's, and they can do whatever they want. Many of these proceedings are quoted elsewhere on the blog. This is of course BS; however criminal investigations are routinely stopped by political pressure in Ireland. A previous such - that of theft of research money at DCU, again brought up in Parliament - was also thwarted.

Surely, then, the thing to do is contact the President? He has kids of his own, nicht wahr? He surely would see the potential for destruction of lives of the students by the behavior of the likes of Grey, Smeaton, Morris and Verbruggen??


























Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 20u Meitheamh 2000

Letting the students speak

The following three entries here will be the voices of students as they saw what happened in 2001-2002. Their anonymity is being respected, and their names will be redacted as necessary from their correspondence with senior members of DCU management.

I feel no similar obligation to DCU management, so will frame the above by noting that

1. Registrar Jim Murray had, months before this incident, advised Smeaton that the subject in question was examinable. More specifically, he said DCU's legal position would be weak if it refused credit

2. The "senior member of the school" referred to at the meeting was Mr Renaat Verbruggen

No attempt has been made by management to compensate the students for the sadistic and criminal treatment meted out to them and I did not solicit any of this material from them.








































Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 19u Meitheamh 2009

The state, civil society, and academic tenure

I am about to break up a very busy schedule, in which I work daily with the most talented and most generous-spirited people I have ever met in the world's attested crucible of symbolic creativity in order to attend Paul Cahill's Supreme court case, at my own expense. One of the reasons for this is that Paul is a truly great human being ; he has taken on forces beyond the ken of 99.9% of humanity and won. Not just the congeries of globalized corporatism and catholic nationalism which defines DCU, the Irish Times and its acolytes at DCU; what is at stake is a totalizing view of the state and society, which must be resisted. Another reason is, of course, the sheer consequentiality of this issue. Let us explore these in turn.

Civil society is a paradoxical concept. It refers to a rule-based set of functions which (as yet) do not have the legislative imprimatur of state. Due to its colonial heritage, Ireland is full of benign civil society structures; the Irish music session; the GAA; traditional Irish music, until IMRO privatized it in the 1998 deal; the intensity of the democratic process which, unlike that in the USA, survived electronic “voting”. Italy is full of benign such, as well as malignant such like the Mafia and Camorra (see the movie and read the book “Gomorrah”; this is what FF would have become, had they not been domesticated; the 1990's saw them revitalize this antinomial dream). The work we Irish people, and our allies from other countries (many of whom were married to Irish people, surely the ultimate vote of confidence in a country) did in setting up DCU, while paid by the state, was largely civil society; we went every day beyond the call of duty, which Danny O'Hare nevertheless attributed to his own Roman Catholic genius. (He never taught there)

FF's impetus has always been to bend the state toward its scams, and then extend the state so that no competition is possible. And now, of course, the Irish state under FF has bankrupted itself, and the IMF calls the shots, as already predicted on this blog:

IMF and NAMA


DCU takes lawsuits against its staff rivalling anything from the Munster circuit at its most extreme;

As frivolous and vexatious as Tom Mallon

A thought experiment; the DCU president shoves mail into your door at home, repeatedly, asking you to do something illegal. Do you agree to do it? Are you in violation of your contract if you don't? No and no, surely? More to the point, we can, I assume, take a criminal case against him and his "legal' advisers after the dust settles - which will be sooner than they think, because even the state is sick of this unsuccessful incursion into civil society.

So what will happen next? Well, IMHO the Supreme Court will throw out DCU's appeal, and comment that it should never have gotten this far. Wrt the EAT; an offer has been made to DCU to obey the law, and deal with all the issues internally. The central issue – of education, and the organic formation of young women and men – was historically made in Ireland through the hedge schools, an a fortiori civil society construct. It is my opinion that we are heading back there from this miasma of criminality, incompetence, and ripping-off taxpayers to pay for perhaps the most laughable self-elected elite since the Hapsburgs . We even have a Prussian – one not married to an Irishwoman - involved.

Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 18u Meitheamh 2009

The “Legal” framework for abolition of tenure

A clearer picture is beginning to emerge of what has gone in in DCU, culminating in this farce at the supreme court and EAT. It required corrupt legal and union officials, as well as that privatizing trend in modern life that Greg Palast memorably called “briberization”. Havoc has been wrought on the lives of talented, dedicated and productive individuals by these scum. Management and their cronies should not think for a second that they will get away with this, and I shall continue to name them here. Herewith:

1.Flush with the limited success of their little “university”, Danny O'Hare and the odd bunch calling the shots at DCU begin getting rid of tenure in the mid-1990's
2.Contracts are changed, nudged away from the notion on tenure agreed with the union. This is aided like the many corrupt union officials like Jack O'Connor, who already has been exposed on this blog. The education branch secretary from 2001-2003 made it clear that O'Connor and Brendan Hayes had banned strikes at DCU, without consulting their “members”
3.IFUT manage to secure guarantees for staff in the 1997 act. The contracts are further reworked to get around these guarantees
4.A strategy is formed for staff tenured pre 1997. Frivolous and vexatious appeals will be the norm, if necessary all the way to the supreme court.
5.An illegal statute is drafted, and passed in 2001, with the imprimatur of Thomas Mallon BL, allowing summary dismissal. Staff will be ground down even when it is established that the new statute cannot apply to them
6.Adjournments, deferrals, appeals, and attempts to bribe students are the norm from management 2001-2009. SIPTU does nothing to ease the burden on staff, or negotiate a new statute. At the first sign of competence in an education branch secretary, she is replaced with an aspiring labour party hack with no ability in the area.
7.Mallon continues to appeal, defer, and so on, even after his experience with the Fanning case shows that his behavior is demonstrably illegal.
8.Political backing for getting rid of tenure is clear from Dail exchanges.

It is terrifying to imagine the resources lost to the state through this criminality, which would only have worked if the rest of us could not read! In the meantime, anyone who colludes with management -like Moyna, Marison et al - should be shunned








Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 17u Meitheamh 2009

Countdown to the Supreme Court

Despite SIPTU's depredations in this area, the union at DCU - considered as the voluntary association of faculty and other staff – is still strong. It is increasingly reasonable to argue that we have been lulled into giving up all employment rights over the past 15 years since SIPTU allowed management unilaterally to change our contracts to weaken tenure. In the meantime, management has been allowed by SIPTU to get away with egregious – and indeed often criminal – acts of bullying and denial of basic rights both to staff and students.

It is clear that we should try and get rid of the school of journalism, hard though this may be. I have argued before that it has no business at a university; moreover, the disgraceful line taken by the (often PhD less) “faculty” who scribble for the Irish Times is anti-tenure and anti-scholarship. (Of course, we should also ban the IT from anywhere union members congregate for its blatant attack on tenure)

I confess that I have felt the burden of trying to keep tenure alive for those tenured before Bloomsday, 1997, a weighty one, particularly as it is clear that SIPTU were prepared to throw the case. The situation as it stands is that NOTHING can be done to prevent individual dismissals of anyone, pre or post 1997. However, what I and Fanning have succeeded in doing is making sure that the application of the statute to anyone pre 1997 is illegal. Believe me - I have refused two settlement offers, and given up much to uphold this principle, which holds regardless of how the EAT turns out.

Paul Cahill more than kept this flame alive in my absence. Now Paul faces the might of the Irish state in the Supreme Court on 29 June. It is incumbent on us to turn up in numbers to show our support; I am coming back from the USA to attend. There have been many who supported Paul and myself, and of course we cannot name them for fear of reprisals in their direction from management, disgraceful though this reality (at a university!) is in fact. I will, however, list a bunch of people who have been less helpful

It divides between the criminal, the treacherous, and useful idiots. There are some who fall on the intersection. In some cases, I will give an explanation.

Criminals

Prondzynski, Conry, Walsh, Smeaton, Morris, Burns, Pratt

No explanation necessary, and I caution P. VERY strongly never to stuff illegal material through the door of my home, nor to defame me in public again. Regular readers will note that I won the libel suit against him; everything here is valid, and nothing he has said about Paul and myself is valid, nor truthful, nor legal .

Traitors

Ian Marison, Niall Moyna, Morris, Smeaton

All have turned up on management's side to give evidence, often perjured such evidence

Traitors/Useful idiots

Eddie Holt and Colm Kenny have taken management's side in their weekly drivel

Heather Ruskin and Marnie Holborow refused to give evidence at the EAT; that latter also at the High Court, even after being summonsed

Renaat Verbruggen and Brian Stone joined Morris, Smeaton and Prondzynski in the bullying of students.

More will be named as events unfold. Strange the paucity of Irish names in the above list. Apart from Kenny and his buddy Conry's , the only one is Moyna's. That name in turn brings up memories of the special Branch uprooting floorboards in the EE department,a counterfeit $$ trail in the US leading to deportation, and DCU faculty explaining in court that "bomb timers" were for one-armed bandits. Ah, the years, the years . Funny what recognizing the Irish state did to these people; did Niall have to show that much enthusiasm for it?


Again, sorry to state the obvious; however, the often ethical expert testimony given by DCU-based expert witnesses at, for example, the Gibraltar shootings inquiry derived partly from their protection by tenure. Moyna and Marison gave evidence at the High Court to help management destroy tenure.

A thuilleadh nios deanai




Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 14u Meitheamh 2009