Monday, August 31, 2009
Representation of staff in disputes with management
SIPTU has a closed shop at DCU. SIPTU also refuses to pay for legal
teams for its “members” in disputes with management, one of which
disputes has rather famously been heard at the supreme court. The
kindest interpretation is that they have a sentimental attachment to the
IR of the 1980's, when social partnership was young, and everyone in
Ireland - business, labour - felt part of the same team. A less
generous interpretation is that they are very, very stingy and unwilling
to rock the boat; my experiences with the musicians' union confirms
this.
SIPTU's in-house legal rep is the socialist republican (mar dhea) Michael Halpenny; one assumes he was chosen as his name is only a slight overestimate of what SIPTU is willing to invest in defending its members. The colossal mess made by their lawyers, Bowler and Geraghty, in the early days of this disciplinary statute fiasco is best attested to by the fact the case went to the supreme court with a member paying from his own pocket to protect his colleagues.
It is important to note that management at DCU has no such compunction about litigation, and that DCU's president now in fact eschews negotiation in favour of litigation. This is consistent with UCC, where the head of HR, Keely, boasted of his acquaintance with the inside of courtrooms – inter alia, the rumoured E4 million of taxpayers' money spent on their loss against Fanning attests to this.
Ferdi's wiki page is rumoured frequently to be edited by its subject. Let us note what it says about the evolution of his industrial relations ideas;
“Von Prondzynski's published academic output has been influential in particular in the field of industrial relations and employment law. In his early work he argued for a disengagement of the law from industrial relations, taking the position that problems and disputes were better resolved through bargaining than through litigation.[4] ...... However, from the later 1980s onwards his views began to moderate, and he argued for a framework of employment regulation that took account of economic pressures and the need to maintain competitive conditions. “
Therefore, we can take it that DCU's ignoring the Labour court recommendation of 2002, RC verdict of 2003, and so on is no coincidence. To put it simply, might makes right, and they have infinite amount of taxpayers' money to pay the moral prostitutes at Arthur cox to destroy the lives of good academic staff. In one case, at least, this had contributed to the premature death of the staff member.
In my case, IBEC withdrew in 2003, and SIPTU allowed Arthur cox defer the hearing scheduled for Oct 8, 2003, with the result that I had to come back from the USA in Nov 2003 (it is now 3 times “on my own dime” that I've had to come back). It was clear that Patricia King and Chris Rowland for SIPTU were utterly unable to compete with Cox; in fact, Ms King was terribly upset by the aggression of Tom Mallon, Cox's counsel.
We needed a legal team, and SIPTU refused to provide one. Let us recall that the use of lawyers was management's idea, not ours; we were equalising representation, but without using taxpayers' money a la management. So I paid an additional 5-figure sum for a legal team, SIPTU withdrew and – lo and behold – the appalling procedural mistakes made by King and Rowland were overturned within an hour of the EAT reconvening on 28 July 2009. Moreover, the cross-examination of Von Prondzynski' was rather informative. It had always been my guess that VP is too fragmented a psyche to hold up under repeated questioning. And so, we not just heard that Josh Howarth took his own life, but also we heard that the disciplinary procedures 1985 agreement are still in place for pre-1997 people. (They were, as it happens, written by Ms King, who did a great job on them).
At the end, Tom Mallon threw us a freebie. One of the central problems in the Cahill case has been the divergence between Paul and VP about details of their meeting. Similarly, I had a meeting with VP in 2001, every detail of my written account of which VP corroborated under redirect from Mallon. VP was perhaps too tired at that stage to keep up his usual bluster.
The days of “negotiation” are indeed over. What management will learn the hard way is that SIPTU were doing a terrific job of protecting them from us, the staff. Equality of representation is European Law (Morris and Steele versus UK, 2005) and this absurd situation with a "union" taking millions every decade essentially to provide inadequate representation is unacceptable.
Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 31 u Lunasa 2009
SIPTU's in-house legal rep is the socialist republican (mar dhea) Michael Halpenny; one assumes he was chosen as his name is only a slight overestimate of what SIPTU is willing to invest in defending its members. The colossal mess made by their lawyers, Bowler and Geraghty, in the early days of this disciplinary statute fiasco is best attested to by the fact the case went to the supreme court with a member paying from his own pocket to protect his colleagues.
It is important to note that management at DCU has no such compunction about litigation, and that DCU's president now in fact eschews negotiation in favour of litigation. This is consistent with UCC, where the head of HR, Keely, boasted of his acquaintance with the inside of courtrooms – inter alia, the rumoured E4 million of taxpayers' money spent on their loss against Fanning attests to this.
Ferdi's wiki page is rumoured frequently to be edited by its subject. Let us note what it says about the evolution of his industrial relations ideas;
“Von Prondzynski's published academic output has been influential in particular in the field of industrial relations and employment law. In his early work he argued for a disengagement of the law from industrial relations, taking the position that problems and disputes were better resolved through bargaining than through litigation.[4] ...... However, from the later 1980s onwards his views began to moderate, and he argued for a framework of employment regulation that took account of economic pressures and the need to maintain competitive conditions. “
Therefore, we can take it that DCU's ignoring the Labour court recommendation of 2002, RC verdict of 2003, and so on is no coincidence. To put it simply, might makes right, and they have infinite amount of taxpayers' money to pay the moral prostitutes at Arthur cox to destroy the lives of good academic staff. In one case, at least, this had contributed to the premature death of the staff member.
In my case, IBEC withdrew in 2003, and SIPTU allowed Arthur cox defer the hearing scheduled for Oct 8, 2003, with the result that I had to come back from the USA in Nov 2003 (it is now 3 times “on my own dime” that I've had to come back). It was clear that Patricia King and Chris Rowland for SIPTU were utterly unable to compete with Cox; in fact, Ms King was terribly upset by the aggression of Tom Mallon, Cox's counsel.
We needed a legal team, and SIPTU refused to provide one. Let us recall that the use of lawyers was management's idea, not ours; we were equalising representation, but without using taxpayers' money a la management. So I paid an additional 5-figure sum for a legal team, SIPTU withdrew and – lo and behold – the appalling procedural mistakes made by King and Rowland were overturned within an hour of the EAT reconvening on 28 July 2009. Moreover, the cross-examination of Von Prondzynski' was rather informative. It had always been my guess that VP is too fragmented a psyche to hold up under repeated questioning. And so, we not just heard that Josh Howarth took his own life, but also we heard that the disciplinary procedures 1985 agreement are still in place for pre-1997 people. (They were, as it happens, written by Ms King, who did a great job on them).
At the end, Tom Mallon threw us a freebie. One of the central problems in the Cahill case has been the divergence between Paul and VP about details of their meeting. Similarly, I had a meeting with VP in 2001, every detail of my written account of which VP corroborated under redirect from Mallon. VP was perhaps too tired at that stage to keep up his usual bluster.
The days of “negotiation” are indeed over. What management will learn the hard way is that SIPTU were doing a terrific job of protecting them from us, the staff. Equality of representation is European Law (Morris and Steele versus UK, 2005) and this absurd situation with a "union" taking millions every decade essentially to provide inadequate representation is unacceptable.
Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 31 u Lunasa 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
The lonely death of Dr. Joshua Howarth
Dr Josh Howarth was a brilliant organic chemist whose book “Core organic
chemistry” (Wiley, 1998) is still being read. Apart from his massive
contributions to campus life at DCU, he was on the editorial board of
“Molecules”. In 2006, we were informed that Josh had died – in very
early middle age – from a stroke, having left DCU a few years
previously. Multiple religious services were held at DCU to commemorate
him. It looked very dignified. His main mentor at DCU had been former
director Albert Pratt.
DCU's president, in his sworn evidence at the EAT, finally told at least part of the story. First of all, he announced that Josh, in fact, had taken his own life. Several of us suspected this all along. Prondzynski then, in front of the press, announced that Josh had been an alcoholic (which is utterly unproven), and many attempts had been made to help him by DCU. Finally, it turns out that, far from leaving voluntarily, Josh had one of DCU's illegal disciplinary procedures used against him. As an Irish citizen, I am appalled that an Englishman suffered in this way at the hands of an Irish state entity.
I myself have been the subject of this “help” from DCU for the past 10 years. The “help” in question is called various things here in the US, like “fraud”, “criminal conspiracy”, and - Arthur Cox's specialty - “malicious prosecution” (Cox would not last for a second in a US courtroom, and are welcome to try and silence this blog over here in the US anytime). Josh's “mentor” Albert Pratt is a fraudster, and it would be easy to prove criminal conspiracy against him here. Moreover, there would be a wrongful death suit against DCU.
Josh had kids, and I am not sure whether I would be alive myself had I responsibilities of this scale. SIPTU should have called a strike immediately. That they have not, to put it gently, shows remarkable tolerance for management.
In the meantime, any staff member who gets a visit from management can fall back on two salient facts;
1.Prondzynski also said under oath that the procedures of the 1985 agreement, not the 2001 statute, obtain in my case. This is what we were trying to establish all along, and it is now game over; anyone tenured pre June 16, 1997 can appeal to the rights granted in 1985.
2.The 2001 statute is currently illegal. Why are there no sanctions against the miscreants who drafted and illegally used it? Why do they keep picking on good scientists, as the country goes down the tubes, and pay utterly incompetent and corrupt lawyers?
Finally, that dozens of academic economists came out against NAMA this week attests to the fact that our work in saving tenure has not been in vain.
Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 28 u Lunasa 2009
PS 15/9/09 I have in the meantime bought Josh's book and gone through the introductory chapter, which I recommend to anyone who, like me, needed to revise this area.
Josh obviously loved, and was totally committed to his subject, and to being an academic. The reason I am alive and he is not is that, being Irish, I knew who DCU management and Arthur cox solicitors are, and knew how to treat them with appropriate contempt as they continue their criminal rampage through yet another state institution in these, the fading years of the first Irish state.
DCU's president, in his sworn evidence at the EAT, finally told at least part of the story. First of all, he announced that Josh, in fact, had taken his own life. Several of us suspected this all along. Prondzynski then, in front of the press, announced that Josh had been an alcoholic (which is utterly unproven), and many attempts had been made to help him by DCU. Finally, it turns out that, far from leaving voluntarily, Josh had one of DCU's illegal disciplinary procedures used against him. As an Irish citizen, I am appalled that an Englishman suffered in this way at the hands of an Irish state entity.
I myself have been the subject of this “help” from DCU for the past 10 years. The “help” in question is called various things here in the US, like “fraud”, “criminal conspiracy”, and - Arthur Cox's specialty - “malicious prosecution” (Cox would not last for a second in a US courtroom, and are welcome to try and silence this blog over here in the US anytime). Josh's “mentor” Albert Pratt is a fraudster, and it would be easy to prove criminal conspiracy against him here. Moreover, there would be a wrongful death suit against DCU.
Josh had kids, and I am not sure whether I would be alive myself had I responsibilities of this scale. SIPTU should have called a strike immediately. That they have not, to put it gently, shows remarkable tolerance for management.
In the meantime, any staff member who gets a visit from management can fall back on two salient facts;
1.Prondzynski also said under oath that the procedures of the 1985 agreement, not the 2001 statute, obtain in my case. This is what we were trying to establish all along, and it is now game over; anyone tenured pre June 16, 1997 can appeal to the rights granted in 1985.
2.The 2001 statute is currently illegal. Why are there no sanctions against the miscreants who drafted and illegally used it? Why do they keep picking on good scientists, as the country goes down the tubes, and pay utterly incompetent and corrupt lawyers?
Finally, that dozens of academic economists came out against NAMA this week attests to the fact that our work in saving tenure has not been in vain.
Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 28 u Lunasa 2009
PS 15/9/09 I have in the meantime bought Josh's book and gone through the introductory chapter, which I recommend to anyone who, like me, needed to revise this area.
Josh obviously loved, and was totally committed to his subject, and to being an academic. The reason I am alive and he is not is that, being Irish, I knew who DCU management and Arthur cox solicitors are, and knew how to treat them with appropriate contempt as they continue their criminal rampage through yet another state institution in these, the fading years of the first Irish state.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
The racist discourse of DCU's president
‘The Last Word with Matt Cooper’ on Thursday (25/6/09)
However, DCU's (German) president has opposing views on this issue. For him, immigration is an unmitigated good. Recently, he announced that the Irish must become an ethnic minority on their own island for his (now tarnished) neoliberal dream to take flesh, an announcement relayed by the Skadi forum;
Germanic online community
Skadi, you will notice, welcomes visitors with this message;
“Welcome to Skadi Forum, the largest Germanic online community forum where you can join over 30,000 members from around the world discussing all things of concern to you”
It is our right as Irish citizens – and a fortiori as academics – to disagree, even vehemently, with mass immigration. This is particularly the case as Minister Lenihan also sees it as an evil. Are DCU management about to call Lenihan a racist?
In fact, Ferdinand began the racist discourse shortly before this conferring/commencement address with his sponsoring Bob Quinn's quaint “The Atlantean Irish” book (Dublin: Lilliput Press, 2005). Bob thanks Ferdi fulsomely for supporting his thesis that the Irish are not “Celts” but - who knows what they are (and really, who cares)? Alert readers will recognize in the “Celtic” appellation itself a political minefield; “Celtic” was a term for the soft feminized “races” on the fringes of the eastern north-eastern atlantic archipelago.
Why the Irish state is prepared generously to subsidize these lunatic attacks on its very identity is a mystery - as indeed is its funding of revisionist historians to attack the state's right to collect the taxes that make their existence possible. In the meantime, those of us who believe that the Lisbon deal is an intensification of the forces that have already almost destroyed our country have a perfect right to say so within and outside the classroom
Seán O Nualláin Ph.D. 26 u Lunasa 2009
