13 ms·

I thought I was being ‘blacklisted’, so I demanded to see colleagues’ emails

140 points by MyHypatia 7y ago

lordfoom 7y ago
An interesting outcome of the GPDR! Does the author have any recourse? Can they sue?
- ceejayoz 7y ago
  For what? Someone's negative opinion of them?
  - eivarv 7y ago
    Well, TFA opens with "Blacklisting at work has been illegal in the UK since 2010", but I guess it'd be hard to argue that what's described is bona fide blacklisting.
  - mattmanser 7y ago
    For libel and slander, calling him stupid when he passed the exams set by the very examiner himself. Loss of earnings, etc. Also against the universities for breach of the blacklisting prohibitions in the employment act. Their lack of checks and balances against this informal blacklist has left them wide open to be sued.
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      There's a wide gap between a blacklisting system and someone getting a bad recommendation from an advisor. I've met plenty of stupid people who can pass exams.
      - traderjane 7y ago
        But intervening on a test result makes you look suspicious and opens you to narrative about motivation.
      - rmellow 7y ago
        Exams are the formal yardstick here, and a serious institution should not subject itself to such a powerful and informal system that is completely unchallengeable and opaque as "your supervisor's secret opinion of you". If "stupid people" are passing these exams, maybe these are not good exams either. Finally, thinking in terms of "stupid people" also incorrectly frames intelligence as a scalar, is unhelpful and lacks descriptive power of how one's mental capacity falls short: Are they socially clueless? Are they forgetful? Are they not able to put in the mental work when it comes to answering questions?
    - jerf 7y ago
      That just gets you into a Catch-22... being seen suing previous employers and supervisors will make it even harder to get hired in that field, and possibly any other as well. If the person in question is not really unpleasant (and I don't know that they are not, but let's take it as given for a moment), my suggestion would be doing some strong networking. If you interact with people at conferences and are clearly not a bad person, then it's easier to defend yourself against the accusations by pointing out their variance with actual experience. In a perfect world, yeah, that work should not be necessary, but nobody's accused the world of being perfect in a long time. (Ironically, if you pull this off and manage to build a new reputation on your own, then you might actually be able to safely sue.)
      - zeveb 7y ago
        > being seen suing previous employers and supervisors will make it even harder to get hired in that field, and possibly any other as well. If you win enough in damages then you don't need to worry too much about earning in the future. No idea how likely that is, particularly after paying attorneys' fees.
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        ghusbands 7y ago
        You seem to be assuming that money is the only goal, rather than, say, contributing in academia.
      - mattmanser 7y ago
        To an extent, but the private sector in the UK learnt a long time ago to simply refuse to give a reference instead of detailing their actual (disprovable) bad opinion. We're only hearing one side, but given his professional accomplishment of people using his textbook in Masters courses, this comes across as a personal vendetta. You don't say those sort of things about someone who clearly does have talent unless you want to cause harm.
  - jsty 7y ago
    The UK has famously strict libel laws, and notably the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove the truth of their defamatory speech. https://www.burnetts.co.uk/publications/blogs/libel-and-slander-laws https://www.burnetts.co.uk/publications/blogs/libel-and-slan... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law
    - lonelappde 7y ago
      Before 2013 in the UK, not even truth was enough of a defense. Truths that caused harm (even justifiable harm) were still actionable. In Austria it's still illegal to make true comments that offend religion sensibilities.
      - DanBC 7y ago
        > Before 2013 in the UK, not even truth was enough of a defense. Wasn't justification a different name for a truth defence?
    - tomatocracy 7y ago
      I think there needs to be an act of publication for defamation law to be engaged though. It might be rather hard to argue that private emails reach that bar.
      - jsty 7y ago
        I'd note that the relevant definition of publish isn't the common-sense use (i.e. make available publicly), but merely "the communication of the defamatory matter to a third person" [0]. Indeed the first link in my prior post specifically calls out defamation via private methods of communication (texting) as something that may be actionable. [0] http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/enforcementguide/court/reporting-defamation.htm http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/enforcementguide/court/reporti...
        ijpoijpoihpiuoh 7y ago
        It seems like the reform act of 2013 might make these comments in-bounds: Honest opinion: It is a defence for defamation, to show the statement complained of was a statement of opinion; that it indicated, in general or specific terms, the basis of the opinion; that an honest person could have held the opinion on any fact which existed when the statement was published, including any fact in a privileged statement that was pre-published. The defence is defeated if the claimant shows the defendant did not hold the opinion.
  - kcseg 7y ago
    There is no concept of free speech in the EU; you can be sued for calling someone stupid, etc.
  - nness 7y ago
    The author mentions their Aspergers; which means the content of those emails, such as comments like 'stupid,' could be seen as coded discrimination. In nearly all of Europe, intellectual disabilities are a topic of non-discrimination legislation. Ignoring the legal arm-chairing; universities and colleges retaining staff who discriminate students based on intellectual disabilities could face down some bad PR.
    - mirages 7y ago
      In France (Law n°2018-493 of June 20, 2018 ) you are not permitted to make any race/illness/political/jugdment statement inside any database system (paper or eletronic) be it public or private
      - istjohn 7y ago
        I wouldn't think an email would be considered to be inside a "database system."
        ape4 7y ago
        Not to us, but its info stored in a structured way so... maybe legally.
        Shivetya 7y ago
        I would hope not. How can one's demand for information supersede another persons right to privacy in their communications? So will this come down to any email which passes through an officially recognized organization, be it government or corporation or educational, as open to inspection and possible litigation? Talk about an Orwellian nightmare
        brokenmachine 7y ago
        You have it backwards. If the government/public corporations keep everything secret, that's the Orwellian nightmare. The person you are suggesting has the right to privacy is acting in an official capacity, paid for by public money. These are not personal emails. Just that fact that one person is bringing a litigation, is not a valid reason to mark everything top secret. If you make everything in the machinations of government secret, then these things (and much worse) will still happen, but there will be no transparency or recourse. That is the worst possible outcome.
  - justin66 7y ago
    Literally the first words in the article: Blacklisting at work has been illegal in the UK since 2010
    - aidenn0 7y ago
      But what is the bar for blacklisting? If I don't like a colleague and someone asks me for my opinion on them, is it blacklisting for me to honestly share my opinion?
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      Sure, but now you have to support the idea that the person in the article was blacklisted. Getting a bad recommendation and getting blacklisted are not the same thing.
- silveroriole 7y ago
  Yes, I’m interested in the legal status of the remarks made about the author. Nothing seems outright discriminatory or illegal; there’s no law against calling people stupid and unpleasant, presumably. And since your PhD supervisor and examiner aren’t your employers, what laws would apply even regarding obviously discriminatory stuff said about you? Do they actually have any legal obligations to bring disciplinary action against someone who is just “unpleasant” before openly calling them unpleasant?
  - matthewheath 7y ago
    The university would have obligations under the Equality Act 2010 - it's possible the Aspergers could be considered a disability. The university wouldn't have an obligation to bring disciplinary proceedings against someone deemed "unpleasant" before calling them such - they would be required to follow their own internal process for raising a disciplinary case. It sounds like the threshold for a disciplinary case wasn't met in this case. In any event, these sorts of remarks are a grey area and any action to take depends entirely on the specific content of the communications. It's not nice to be called "unpleasant", but it's probably not libellous.
- DanBC 7y ago
  Not really. Defamation in England is not easy to sue for. The OP has to show that the statements were published, they are defamatory, and that the OP suffered serious harm as a result. It'd be for the publisher of the comments to prove (on the balance of probabilities) that the comments were either truthful fair comment privileged Suing someone for defamation is expensive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law
- matthewheath 7y ago
  Yes, they can sue – anyone can sue for anything, after all. Would they win? Maybe, but the cost would probably not be worth it and of course there's the reputational damage caused by being seen as someone willing to litigate against their employer / university, etc.
  - mywittyname 7y ago
    At this point, they seem to be rather close to the bottom anyway. So their best option probably involves self-employment related to their field of study. A settlement can go a long way towards financing their endeavor.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
hycaria 7y ago
>Where my personality was called into question perhaps my working-class background, my northern accent, and my Aspergers could be a reasonable explanation. Easier to resort to such hypotheses than be self critical, I guess. Do we really fall in the category where one student with apparently decent thesis results gets ostarcized by her advisor AND the examiners, where no one in the faculty or comittee would stand for her, even though successfull students do bring a lot of prestige to their team, lab and advisor ? Would it really be in their interest if they have no reason to ? She is doubtly their first tutored PhD ever, and I guess have they seen enough to give feedback that is relied on by other actors in the field ? I mean, we're all old enough to have met people that despite competence are hard to work (or be) with and would rather not have to deal with. And considering she did a smart and unconventional GDPR request, and she's legitimately pissed off about its results but goes as far as to publish in the press about it...
- black_puppydog 7y ago
  Doing this behind her back, and without recourse, refusing to talk about it to the person in question, basically the whole way this happened, does not shine a good light on the advisors here. Plus, you may have noticed, she wrote under a non-identifiable name (outside maybe people already in the know) and didn't name the people in question, nor the institutions. So yeah, she's pissed, IMHO rightfully so, especially since this is a career breaking thing and without recourse.
  - hycaria 7y ago
    So personal recommandations should be disclosed ? That kinda goes against the point of trying to have an open discussion about a potential appliant. And what would the recourse be anyways ? What good would a talk do, since admittedly it's a person and not a work problem ? Do any good come out of people explaining how they despise your attitude, especially with high stakes, where no response will ever bring closure ? Yes, btw I hope the publisher has more insight than the reader and does a background check. Edit : though I agree that the team should've hold a discussion, as sterile as it probably would've been, for it's own reputation.
motohagiography 7y ago
Anecdotally, I met someone who stopped updating their linkedin profile because he found out someone was making anonymous comments and allegations to his employers. He didn't know what they were or who it was because it came second hand from a colleague who told him that an exec had asked about him because of an anonymous message. Also, whisper networks in tech are very much a thing and they are full of just the quality of people you would expect to find in them. When asked about people I truly can't stand, I say I am sympathetic to the barriers they faced to success and we didn't know each other well. It's not a code, it's the truth. I don't give much weight to the opinions of people who are cruel or have axes to grind either. This is a rare view. Keep your public social networks well-pruned. Don't talk about plans, the future, or uncertain opportunities, and if you work for crappy people, get out as fast as you can before you give them an unlimited option on causing your reputation harm for the rest of your career.
- wallace_f 7y ago
  The real world is crazy. The amount of bullying, stalking and attacks I've gotten after getting a series of promotions in a rotten workplace with a few bad apples is unbelievable. If I knew better, I'd have paid attention to the above comment.
  - mistermann 7y ago
    > The real world is crazy. It's quite amazing how large the gap is between the way the world is described to us through various mediums, versus the clearly observable reality of it. FTA: > I approached the individuals and the institutions concerned about the content of my Subject Access Request. They all refused to discuss the matter with me, so I can only speculate as to what was going on. Of course, these people were just "avoiding drama" they'd tell us. But then, is avoiding drama that what they were doing when they were trashing this person behind their back in emails? I think people have a tendency to conceptualize a stark, "real" line between adolescence and adulthood, but the reality of the matter seems to be that many adults are little more than high school kids plus some added expertise in some narrow domains. The adult world, even at the highest levels of authority, largely consists of the same petty cliques, backstabbing, lying, and whatnot that you'd experience in high school.
GordonS 7y ago
> I was able to ask my PhD college, and several other institutions, to see all emails in which my name appeared in either the subject line or the body of the email Hmm, I don't think I like this, and I don't understand how the GDPR allows you to do this. While I understand that stored emails that mention you are technically "data about you", I wouldn't consider them "your data". Emails are a form of personal communication, and are only really accessible by the author and recipients. Furthermore, those emails would contain PI about other individuals - what of their rights, or indeed the rights of the email authors (regardless of the message content)? I support the GDPR, but I don't think using it like this falls within it's intent.
- bryanrasmussen 7y ago
  yeah I would argue that was a data breach.
- awakeasleep 7y ago
  Interesting. In the USA emails are considered property of the employer. Outside of that, what is your take on the fact that there must be administrators that have the ability to look through all a system's email?
- icebraining 7y ago
  The GDPR does say "the right to obtain a copy (...) shall not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others", but it doesn't spell out what that means. Still, your work email account can be monitored by your employer (though in the EU they have to provide notice of that monitoring), so you don't have the same protection as in a private account. OTOH, it could be a violation of privacy / data-protection for the author of this piece to be divulging the contents of these emails, even if they have a right to a copy.
  - GordonS 7y ago
    > rights and freedoms of others", but it doesn't spell out what that means Hmm, that's unfortunate it's not at least a little more specific, but at the least I'd expect the right to lawful freedom of speech. I get that these are "work emails", but this just feels very wrong to me, and doesn't seem to fit with the intent of the GDPR.
harryh 7y ago
You can generally do the same thing in the US for emails to/from public university addresses with a FOIA request. This seems kind of wild to me, but apparently it works.
- wallace_f 7y ago
  Would this work in the way the article described? Any email between other people containing your name in it?
  - harryh 7y ago
    Yes.
    - wallace_f 7y ago
      But private, no such luck?
- inetknght 7y ago
  Does FOIA apply to private companies? I thought it only applies to governmental institutions.
  - LyndsySimon 7y ago
    I'm not an expert here, and I'd have to go read the law in detail to know for sure, but my limited experience leads me to believe that it likely does apply to private companies in the course of business in some cases. If the company is a federal contractor, for instance, there are a slew of federal regulations with which they must comply to remain eligible for contracts. Likewise, government grants come with strings attached as well. Finally, if the behavior that you're investigating is illegal - such as discrimination against a "protected class" - there's always the possibility of suing them and acquiring the documents through discovery. All it takes is money.
  - btrettel 7y ago
    There was a recent discussion on the FOI-L listserv about when a private entity is subject to public records requests: https://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=FOI-L;326b96b.1907 https://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=FOI-L;326b96b.190... While the example applies only for Washington state, I imagine other states have similar laws. Edit: Appears you need to be logged in to view the message. Here's the message: > In Washington, we have well-established case law that allows private entities to be considered the functional equivalent of an agency, based on a four-part test established by the court in the Telford case. There’s a lot of info online about it, but here’s a concise article: http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/January-2017/When-Must-a-Private-Entity-Comply-with-the-PRA.aspx http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/January-2017.... The factors of the test are: > 1. Whether the entity performs a governmental function; > 2. The extent to which government funds the entity’s activities; > 3. The extent of government involvement in the entity’s activities; and > 4. Whether the entity was created by the government. > It’s been applied to entire agencies, and to individual contracts being performed on behalf of public agencies. We’ve also seen individuals be deemed the functional equivalent of a government employee for purposes of PRA compliance.
linuxftw 7y ago
The world of high academics is a social network that operates on control and nepotism. People want to continue enriching these elitist crooks by ensuring the state pays for everyone's 'higher education.' We need to outlaw job and licensing degree requirements. It should suffice to pass an industry examination at this point.
air7 7y ago
> Where my personality was called into question perhaps my working-class background, my northern accent, and my Asperger's could be a reasonable explanation. It's quite likely that ones background and developmental disorders shape one's personality. However, it's still their personality. So what if it has a reason? This touches on the dark abyss of "free will". In some sense all we are is a cellular-automata chugging along according to the laws of physics. In that sense everything one does has a "reason". Yet we live our lives, and shape our societies, with the idea that sane adults have an ability to chart their own course, in some sense. (in contrast to children or "insane" people who are considered more reactive/automatic hence not responsible for their actions). What part of my actions are my responsibility (and therefor have consequences) and what part is beyond my control (and should be forgiven, at least partially)?
- zwkrt 7y ago
  “There but for the grace of God go I”, a sentiment even atheistic people should share. Maybe in dry scientific speak, “if it weren’t for the entirety of human culture, evolution, and the specific conditions of the Earth from prehistory until the present, I would not be here where I am today in my particular frame of mind. I didn’t even get to choose which ‘I’ I am, I could have been the person I hate or pity instead”
  - xkcd-sucks 7y ago
    People that don't believe in the supernatural can still appreciate the usefulness of God as a metaphor and concept. Provided they don't take things too seriously :)
- sysbin 7y ago
  Free will is an illusion and simply it doesn't exist. You cannot make either a choice or decision that's truly your own. Simply, you cannot without being effected by the system you're in. People don't choose the life they're born into and why does anything that comes after birth be assumed differently. The answer cultural conditioning and from religious ideology that has rooted deeply into society. The belief that god gave humanity free will. No part of your actions are truly the responsibility of you as a person but the fate of cause & effect and everything outside one's control. The system of society with genetics & environment being imperfect makes bad people. Otherwise we would just have 'people' in a system of perfect equality.
nkurz 7y ago
There are new EU-wide data regulations, known as the GDPR, that were introduced in 2018. These regulations allow people to make a data request, called a Subject Access Request, to any institution that holds any data on them. The definition of data is pretty broad, and I was able to ask my PhD college, and several other institutions, to see all emails in which my name appeared in either the subject line or the body of the email. While it may now be legal in the EU to request a copy of all emails that mention you by name, socially it would be a terrible betrayal of trust. Ironically, this seems like clear confirmatory evidence of the sort of red-flag behavior that would cause an advisor to send private emails strongly discouraging others from hiring you even if you were qualified on-paper for the position.
- sct202 7y ago
  That doesn't seem fair since the emails were sent long before the writer made the requests. If she had never asked for the emails, the same things would be said about her.
  - nkurz 7y ago
    Sure, I don't mean that it was evidence at the time, rather that suspicions held by the advisor seem to have been proved true. I presume that advisor felt justified in warning others that the author might be a problematic hire, and a scandal like this is evidence that the suspicion was correct. I think the right question to ask is whether an advisor is obligated to give positive recommendations for an advisee if they come to regret having taken them on. My sense is that the advisor was correct to notice that socially something was "off" about the author, and correct that others might regret hiring her, just as he(?) had come to regret choosing her as a student. I don't know though whether it's legal under current EU law to act on these observations and experiences.
Singletoned 7y ago
As a fellow Aspy, I started reading this thinking, I bet he's a bit of a difficult person. Maybe an Aspy. > Where my personality was called into question perhaps my working-class background, my northern accent, and my Aspergers could be a reasonable explanation. Ah! Yes, I can guess which one of those three is the reason people found you difficult.
- Circuits 7y ago
  I don't know anyone with Asperger personally but based on my limited research and foreknowledge of the the condition I found it rather odd that the author would be surprised by any of this. I don't have Asperger's and even I wouldn't be surprised by any of this if it were to happen to me.
- clavalle 7y ago
  I know plenty of people on the spectrum that are pleasant to be around and work with. Engaging differently socially, while difficult in some sense, isn't necessarily unpleasant.
- matthewowen 7y ago
  As a working-class northerner, I can see the case for the other two :).
- ggm 7y ago
  I also suspect its the classic South/North Bias. The Watford and south mob simply cannot handle Geordie, or Scots. Good that we both got there.
- neonate 7y ago
  Probably a she? The author is listed as Dora B.
bryanrasmussen 7y ago
I actually think I've been "blacklisted" at a government agency in my country, or at least someone with hiring power must be working there who specifically does not want to hire me. Two reasons - 1. some years ago there was a job listing at the agency for a programmer with experience in a governmental specification that I was the technical guy in the working group that made the specification, for heavy experience in some technologies I am very good at, including some international standards in which I am thanked as one of the contributors to the standard and when I applied I got the standard reply some months later they went with someone more qualified which is their choice however I can say with 99.9% certainty there was only one other person in the country possibly more qualified than I am (given the technologies involved and the time) and he wasn't applying. 2. another time they put up a technical challenge and normally when I complete a technical challenge of the particular sort I did the potential employer likes to meet me (they put it online and said try to do this and see if you would be someone we might like to hire). And they said they decided to go with someone else but they did not have any comments on my technical challenge. So what I'm saying I would really like to get all details from any communications regarding possibly hiring me from that ministry because it might be interesting, but then again I am also of the kind of personality that it just might infuriate me - and what good is that?
- sct202 7y ago
  I don't know if your government is like my government, but a lot of the hiring decisions my government makes are often corrupt and based on X government leader owes Y person so this job will go to one of Y person's friends.
- dahdum 7y ago
  You could be right, but "more qualified" doesn't have to mean "technical expertise in this exact standard". They could easily be weighing factors such as previous leadership experience, team/group experience, stated career goals, stated interests, demeanor, or experience in other tangential technologies.
  - bryanrasmussen 7y ago
turk73 7y ago
"You are ostracised and isolated. You muddle through, teaching on fixed-term, part-time, zero-hours contracts, a low-paid disposable commodity, writing papers, chapters and articles in what little spare time you have, and believing what you’ve been told, that success is based on merit, that talent is the most important thing, and that if you work hard and hang in there you’ll get there in the end." I know exactly how the system works in academia. Try being anything other than a Bolshevik and you quickly find out that the machine will identify you and terminate you via a subtle, imprecise but very effective means of shunning, avoidance, and other forms of covert hostility until you give up and go away. It is the same in the corporate world as well, just not fully activated there yet. Screw the small-minded people doing this. No matter your academic qualifications, what does it say about you as a human being if you can't understand and accept that other people have different ideas and different opinions and that they can't just be ignored or swept away just because you hold onto a bunch of foregone conclusions that you simply accept as right? That's never been right, not ever. Universities are supposed to be a marketplace of ideas but instead are conformity factories. I have this to say: That is an echo chamber and although people feel secure inside there and smug about it, all such echo chambers eventually end.
Grue3 7y ago
>I was able to ask my PhD college, and several other institutions, to see all emails in which my name appeared in either the subject line or the body of the email. The scariest part is that this is apparently possible in countries under the jurisdiction of GDPR now (and possibly even outside of it). Your private emails talking about a third party might be exposed at the request of the said third party. Does no one else consider this extremely concerning?
- Silhouette 7y ago
  There is certainly an ethical challenge in balancing privacy and data protection issues when there is more than one subject involved, as in this case with both the PhD graduate and those other parties whose emails referred to them. It seems a terrible precedent if any communications service may in general be required to disclose the otherwise private communications of its users if they happen to mention any individual by name (or, presumably, any other identifying features, since this is the GDPR). On the other hand, for matters of professional/business correspondence that relate to a specific individual, where the information being stored or shared around may be incorrect or misleading and the individual is being personally harmed as a result, isn't that exactly the sort of problem that data protection laws (and the anti-blacklisting laws, and defamation laws more generally, for that matter) are trying to fix? It doesn't make any practical difference whether the questionable personal data happens to be stored in something structured like a formal employee record or in unstructured form through emails shared by other staff. It's the data, how it's being used and who is using it that matter the most.
- gota 7y ago
  Regulations that are stronger than they should are made to be broken and circumvented. There's at least one likely future in which, following a couple multi-million lawsuit baseds on such requests, a kind of 'blind referencing' becomes the norm, taught and enforced by companies and organizations. "Never refer to individuals by name, use the Company Directory's Hash Function". Or something silly like that. Just like companies delete employees emails in the second they are allowed to do so by law - can you imagine if the law was to keep them forever? We'd have extreme changes in email formats and technology every decade or so, to render it impossible to read old-enough emails from disgruntled ex-employees and etc.
vectorEQ 7y ago
i feel for this person. my mother got blacklisted in her teaching profession, this stress triggered in her dormant traumas from her childhood, and she's been on medication now for 20 years due to these people pushing her over the edge with such behaviours. no matter how good you feel about yourself, give others a chance, even if they dont 'gel well with you'. don't feel 'threatened' by other people who are talented, feel graced by their wits and try to grow from them instead of kicking them down. lack of respect and integrity at its worst, it's an epidemic in our society.
crb002 7y ago
Victim of nasty blacklisting myself. My advise is to be way nicer and make far more friends in the industry than the blacklister. Especially if you are autistic spectrum, you need a good support network.
- silveroriole 7y ago
  In other words, the solution to someone thinking you’re unlikeable and hard to work with is to become more likeable? Who could have guessed ;)
ptaipale 7y ago
> "I was able to ask my PhD college, and several other institutions, to see all emails in which my name appeared ..." How are different people with the same name distinguished in these cases? Name might be (almost) unambiguous for some people, but lots of us have many, many namesakes. Is the institution required to reliably tell apart which of the messages were meaning the person making the information request, and which were talking about someone else? What are the penalties for leaking emails that were discussing someone else who has the same name?
BeetleB 7y ago
I think people should keep a few things in mind. First, we have only one side of the story. The claim is the advisor never spoke to her about the problems he had with her, and we shouldn't simply assume the claim is true. OTOH, I can easily believe it is, given my experience in grad school. While some professors were quite fussy about quality in the thesis, others accepted that most PhD's (in engineering) are not targeting scientific research after the degree, and lower the standards to allow them to graduate. But they absolutely will not support such people in getting a research position at a university or a government lab. Some are open about it: "If you're targeting research and want my recommendations for that endeavor, this is what you need to do. If not, then all you need is X, Y and Z." Unfortunately, not all advisors are as frank. Also keep in mind that the person may well have been a very competent researcher, while simultaneously being hard to work with. It's quite fair to point it out when asked, and it's quite fair to disrecommend someone because of it. I don't think the article presents any evidence of active blacklisting, where one is going out of their way to tell everyone (without solicitation) "Don't hire this person!" Finally, the real issue: What role should references play in the hiring process? I personally would love a world where we never rely on letters of recommendation and references - I think they are the weakest link in the hiring process. However, if we do accept references/letters of recommendation, then everything in the article is fair game. If you ever asked someone what they thought of a candidate before hiring them, you are part of the same culture that this person's advisor is.

140 points by MyHypatia 7y ago

lordfoom 7y ago

An interesting outcome of the GPDR! Does the author have any recourse? Can they sue?

ceejayoz 7y ago
For what? Someone's negative opinion of them?
- eivarv 7y ago
  Well, TFA opens with "Blacklisting at work has been illegal in the UK since 2010", but I guess it'd be hard to argue that what's described is bona fide blacklisting.
- mattmanser 7y ago
  For libel and slander, calling him stupid when he passed the exams set by the very examiner himself. Loss of earnings, etc. Also against the universities for breach of the blacklisting prohibitions in the employment act. Their lack of checks and balances against this informal blacklist has left them wide open to be sued.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    There's a wide gap between a blacklisting system and someone getting a bad recommendation from an advisor. I've met plenty of stupid people who can pass exams.
    - traderjane 7y ago
      But intervening on a test result makes you look suspicious and opens you to narrative about motivation.
    - rmellow 7y ago
      Exams are the formal yardstick here, and a serious institution should not subject itself to such a powerful and informal system that is completely unchallengeable and opaque as "your supervisor's secret opinion of you". If "stupid people" are passing these exams, maybe these are not good exams either. Finally, thinking in terms of "stupid people" also incorrectly frames intelligence as a scalar, is unhelpful and lacks descriptive power of how one's mental capacity falls short: Are they socially clueless? Are they forgetful? Are they not able to put in the mental work when it comes to answering questions?
  - jerf 7y ago
    That just gets you into a Catch-22... being seen suing previous employers and supervisors will make it even harder to get hired in that field, and possibly any other as well. If the person in question is not really unpleasant (and I don't know that they are not, but let's take it as given for a moment), my suggestion would be doing some strong networking. If you interact with people at conferences and are clearly not a bad person, then it's easier to defend yourself against the accusations by pointing out their variance with actual experience. In a perfect world, yeah, that work should not be necessary, but nobody's accused the world of being perfect in a long time. (Ironically, if you pull this off and manage to build a new reputation on your own, then you might actually be able to safely sue.)
    - zeveb 7y ago
      > being seen suing previous employers and supervisors will make it even harder to get hired in that field, and possibly any other as well. If you win enough in damages then you don't need to worry too much about earning in the future. No idea how likely that is, particularly after paying attorneys' fees.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - ghusbands 7y ago
        You seem to be assuming that money is the only goal, rather than, say, contributing in academia.
    - mattmanser 7y ago
      To an extent, but the private sector in the UK learnt a long time ago to simply refuse to give a reference instead of detailing their actual (disprovable) bad opinion. We're only hearing one side, but given his professional accomplishment of people using his textbook in Masters courses, this comes across as a personal vendetta. You don't say those sort of things about someone who clearly does have talent unless you want to cause harm.
- jsty 7y ago
  The UK has famously strict libel laws, and notably the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove the truth of their defamatory speech. https://www.burnetts.co.uk/publications/blogs/libel-and-slander-laws https://www.burnetts.co.uk/publications/blogs/libel-and-slan... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    Before 2013 in the UK, not even truth was enough of a defense. Truths that caused harm (even justifiable harm) were still actionable. In Austria it's still illegal to make true comments that offend religion sensibilities.
    - DanBC 7y ago
      > Before 2013 in the UK, not even truth was enough of a defense. Wasn't justification a different name for a truth defence?
  - tomatocracy 7y ago
    I think there needs to be an act of publication for defamation law to be engaged though. It might be rather hard to argue that private emails reach that bar.
    - jsty 7y ago
      I'd note that the relevant definition of publish isn't the common-sense use (i.e. make available publicly), but merely "the communication of the defamatory matter to a third person" [0]. Indeed the first link in my prior post specifically calls out defamation via private methods of communication (texting) as something that may be actionable. [0] http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/enforcementguide/court/reporting-defamation.htm http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/enforcementguide/court/reporti...
      - ijpoijpoihpiuoh 7y ago
        It seems like the reform act of 2013 might make these comments in-bounds: Honest opinion: It is a defence for defamation, to show the statement complained of was a statement of opinion; that it indicated, in general or specific terms, the basis of the opinion; that an honest person could have held the opinion on any fact which existed when the statement was published, including any fact in a privileged statement that was pre-published. The defence is defeated if the claimant shows the defendant did not hold the opinion.
- kcseg 7y ago
  There is no concept of free speech in the EU; you can be sued for calling someone stupid, etc.
- nness 7y ago
  The author mentions their Aspergers; which means the content of those emails, such as comments like 'stupid,' could be seen as coded discrimination. In nearly all of Europe, intellectual disabilities are a topic of non-discrimination legislation. Ignoring the legal arm-chairing; universities and colleges retaining staff who discriminate students based on intellectual disabilities could face down some bad PR.
  - mirages 7y ago
    In France (Law n°2018-493 of June 20, 2018 ) you are not permitted to make any race/illness/political/jugdment statement inside any database system (paper or eletronic) be it public or private
    - istjohn 7y ago
      I wouldn't think an email would be considered to be inside a "database system."
      - ape4 7y ago
        Not to us, but its info stored in a structured way so... maybe legally.
        Shivetya 7y ago
        I would hope not. How can one's demand for information supersede another persons right to privacy in their communications? So will this come down to any email which passes through an officially recognized organization, be it government or corporation or educational, as open to inspection and possible litigation? Talk about an Orwellian nightmare
        brokenmachine 7y ago
        You have it backwards. If the government/public corporations keep everything secret, that's the Orwellian nightmare. The person you are suggesting has the right to privacy is acting in an official capacity, paid for by public money. These are not personal emails. Just that fact that one person is bringing a litigation, is not a valid reason to mark everything top secret. If you make everything in the machinations of government secret, then these things (and much worse) will still happen, but there will be no transparency or recourse. That is the worst possible outcome.
- justin66 7y ago
  Literally the first words in the article: Blacklisting at work has been illegal in the UK since 2010
  - aidenn0 7y ago
    But what is the bar for blacklisting? If I don't like a colleague and someone asks me for my opinion on them, is it blacklisting for me to honestly share my opinion?
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    Sure, but now you have to support the idea that the person in the article was blacklisted. Getting a bad recommendation and getting blacklisted are not the same thing.
silveroriole 7y ago
Yes, I’m interested in the legal status of the remarks made about the author. Nothing seems outright discriminatory or illegal; there’s no law against calling people stupid and unpleasant, presumably. And since your PhD supervisor and examiner aren’t your employers, what laws would apply even regarding obviously discriminatory stuff said about you? Do they actually have any legal obligations to bring disciplinary action against someone who is just “unpleasant” before openly calling them unpleasant?
- matthewheath 7y ago
  The university would have obligations under the Equality Act 2010 - it's possible the Aspergers could be considered a disability. The university wouldn't have an obligation to bring disciplinary proceedings against someone deemed "unpleasant" before calling them such - they would be required to follow their own internal process for raising a disciplinary case. It sounds like the threshold for a disciplinary case wasn't met in this case. In any event, these sorts of remarks are a grey area and any action to take depends entirely on the specific content of the communications. It's not nice to be called "unpleasant", but it's probably not libellous.
DanBC 7y ago
Not really. Defamation in England is not easy to sue for. The OP has to show that the statements were published, they are defamatory, and that the OP suffered serious harm as a result. It'd be for the publisher of the comments to prove (on the balance of probabilities) that the comments were either truthful fair comment privileged Suing someone for defamation is expensive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_defamation_law
matthewheath 7y ago
Yes, they can sue – anyone can sue for anything, after all. Would they win? Maybe, but the cost would probably not be worth it and of course there's the reputational damage caused by being seen as someone willing to litigate against their employer / university, etc.
- mywittyname 7y ago
  At this point, they seem to be rather close to the bottom anyway. So their best option probably involves self-employment related to their field of study. A settlement can go a long way towards financing their endeavor.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

hycaria 7y ago

>Where my personality was called into question perhaps my working-class background, my northern accent, and my Aspergers could be a reasonable explanation. Easier to resort to such hypotheses than be self critical, I guess. Do we really fall in the category where one student with apparently decent thesis results gets ostarcized by her advisor AND the examiners, where no one in the faculty or comittee would stand for her, even though successfull students do bring a lot of prestige to their team, lab and advisor ? Would it really be in their interest if they have no reason to ? She is doubtly their first tutored PhD ever, and I guess have they seen enough to give feedback that is relied on by other actors in the field ? I mean, we're all old enough to have met people that despite competence are hard to work (or be) with and would rather not have to deal with. And considering she did a smart and unconventional GDPR request, and she's legitimately pissed off about its results but goes as far as to publish in the press about it...

black_puppydog 7y ago
Doing this behind her back, and without recourse, refusing to talk about it to the person in question, basically the whole way this happened, does not shine a good light on the advisors here. Plus, you may have noticed, she wrote under a non-identifiable name (outside maybe people already in the know) and didn't name the people in question, nor the institutions. So yeah, she's pissed, IMHO rightfully so, especially since this is a career breaking thing and without recourse.
- hycaria 7y ago
  So personal recommandations should be disclosed ? That kinda goes against the point of trying to have an open discussion about a potential appliant. And what would the recourse be anyways ? What good would a talk do, since admittedly it's a person and not a work problem ? Do any good come out of people explaining how they despise your attitude, especially with high stakes, where no response will ever bring closure ? Yes, btw I hope the publisher has more insight than the reader and does a background check. Edit : though I agree that the team should've hold a discussion, as sterile as it probably would've been, for it's own reputation.

motohagiography 7y ago

Anecdotally, I met someone who stopped updating their linkedin profile because he found out someone was making anonymous comments and allegations to his employers. He didn't know what they were or who it was because it came second hand from a colleague who told him that an exec had asked about him because of an anonymous message. Also, whisper networks in tech are very much a thing and they are full of just the quality of people you would expect to find in them. When asked about people I truly can't stand, I say I am sympathetic to the barriers they faced to success and we didn't know each other well. It's not a code, it's the truth. I don't give much weight to the opinions of people who are cruel or have axes to grind either. This is a rare view. Keep your public social networks well-pruned. Don't talk about plans, the future, or uncertain opportunities, and if you work for crappy people, get out as fast as you can before you give them an unlimited option on causing your reputation harm for the rest of your career.

wallace_f 7y ago
The real world is crazy. The amount of bullying, stalking and attacks I've gotten after getting a series of promotions in a rotten workplace with a few bad apples is unbelievable. If I knew better, I'd have paid attention to the above comment.
- mistermann 7y ago
  > The real world is crazy. It's quite amazing how large the gap is between the way the world is described to us through various mediums, versus the clearly observable reality of it. FTA: > I approached the individuals and the institutions concerned about the content of my Subject Access Request. They all refused to discuss the matter with me, so I can only speculate as to what was going on. Of course, these people were just "avoiding drama" they'd tell us. But then, is avoiding drama that what they were doing when they were trashing this person behind their back in emails? I think people have a tendency to conceptualize a stark, "real" line between adolescence and adulthood, but the reality of the matter seems to be that many adults are little more than high school kids plus some added expertise in some narrow domains. The adult world, even at the highest levels of authority, largely consists of the same petty cliques, backstabbing, lying, and whatnot that you'd experience in high school.

GordonS 7y ago

> I was able to ask my PhD college, and several other institutions, to see all emails in which my name appeared in either the subject line or the body of the email Hmm, I don't think I like this, and I don't understand how the GDPR allows you to do this. While I understand that stored emails that mention you are technically "data about you", I wouldn't consider them "your data". Emails are a form of personal communication, and are only really accessible by the author and recipients. Furthermore, those emails would contain PI about other individuals - what of their rights, or indeed the rights of the email authors (regardless of the message content)? I support the GDPR, but I don't think using it like this falls within it's intent.

bryanrasmussen 7y ago
yeah I would argue that was a data breach.
awakeasleep 7y ago
Interesting. In the USA emails are considered property of the employer. Outside of that, what is your take on the fact that there must be administrators that have the ability to look through all a system's email?
icebraining 7y ago
The GDPR does say "the right to obtain a copy (...) shall not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others", but it doesn't spell out what that means. Still, your work email account can be monitored by your employer (though in the EU they have to provide notice of that monitoring), so you don't have the same protection as in a private account. OTOH, it could be a violation of privacy / data-protection for the author of this piece to be divulging the contents of these emails, even if they have a right to a copy.
- GordonS 7y ago
  > rights and freedoms of others", but it doesn't spell out what that means Hmm, that's unfortunate it's not at least a little more specific, but at the least I'd expect the right to lawful freedom of speech. I get that these are "work emails", but this just feels very wrong to me, and doesn't seem to fit with the intent of the GDPR.

harryh 7y ago

You can generally do the same thing in the US for emails to/from public university addresses with a FOIA request. This seems kind of wild to me, but apparently it works.

wallace_f 7y ago
Would this work in the way the article described? Any email between other people containing your name in it?
- harryh 7y ago
  Yes.
  - wallace_f 7y ago
    But private, no such luck?
inetknght 7y ago
Does FOIA apply to private companies? I thought it only applies to governmental institutions.
- LyndsySimon 7y ago
  I'm not an expert here, and I'd have to go read the law in detail to know for sure, but my limited experience leads me to believe that it likely does apply to private companies in the course of business in some cases. If the company is a federal contractor, for instance, there are a slew of federal regulations with which they must comply to remain eligible for contracts. Likewise, government grants come with strings attached as well. Finally, if the behavior that you're investigating is illegal - such as discrimination against a "protected class" - there's always the possibility of suing them and acquiring the documents through discovery. All it takes is money.
- btrettel 7y ago
  There was a recent discussion on the FOI-L listserv about when a private entity is subject to public records requests: https://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=FOI-L;326b96b.1907 https://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=FOI-L;326b96b.190... While the example applies only for Washington state, I imagine other states have similar laws. Edit: Appears you need to be logged in to view the message. Here's the message: > In Washington, we have well-established case law that allows private entities to be considered the functional equivalent of an agency, based on a four-part test established by the court in the Telford case. There’s a lot of info online about it, but here’s a concise article: http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/January-2017/When-Must-a-Private-Entity-Comply-with-the-PRA.aspx http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/January-2017.... The factors of the test are: > 1. Whether the entity performs a governmental function; > 2. The extent to which government funds the entity’s activities; > 3. The extent of government involvement in the entity’s activities; and > 4. Whether the entity was created by the government. > It’s been applied to entire agencies, and to individual contracts being performed on behalf of public agencies. We’ve also seen individuals be deemed the functional equivalent of a government employee for purposes of PRA compliance.

linuxftw 7y ago

The world of high academics is a social network that operates on control and nepotism. People want to continue enriching these elitist crooks by ensuring the state pays for everyone's 'higher education.' We need to outlaw job and licensing degree requirements. It should suffice to pass an industry examination at this point.

air7 7y ago

> Where my personality was called into question perhaps my working-class background, my northern accent, and my Asperger's could be a reasonable explanation. It's quite likely that ones background and developmental disorders shape one's personality. However, it's still their personality. So what if it has a reason? This touches on the dark abyss of "free will". In some sense all we are is a cellular-automata chugging along according to the laws of physics. In that sense everything one does has a "reason". Yet we live our lives, and shape our societies, with the idea that sane adults have an ability to chart their own course, in some sense. (in contrast to children or "insane" people who are considered more reactive/automatic hence not responsible for their actions). What part of my actions are my responsibility (and therefor have consequences) and what part is beyond my control (and should be forgiven, at least partially)?

zwkrt 7y ago
“There but for the grace of God go I”, a sentiment even atheistic people should share. Maybe in dry scientific speak, “if it weren’t for the entirety of human culture, evolution, and the specific conditions of the Earth from prehistory until the present, I would not be here where I am today in my particular frame of mind. I didn’t even get to choose which ‘I’ I am, I could have been the person I hate or pity instead”
- xkcd-sucks 7y ago
  People that don't believe in the supernatural can still appreciate the usefulness of God as a metaphor and concept. Provided they don't take things too seriously :)
sysbin 7y ago
Free will is an illusion and simply it doesn't exist. You cannot make either a choice or decision that's truly your own. Simply, you cannot without being effected by the system you're in. People don't choose the life they're born into and why does anything that comes after birth be assumed differently. The answer cultural conditioning and from religious ideology that has rooted deeply into society. The belief that god gave humanity free will. No part of your actions are truly the responsibility of you as a person but the fate of cause & effect and everything outside one's control. The system of society with genetics & environment being imperfect makes bad people. Otherwise we would just have 'people' in a system of perfect equality.

nkurz 7y ago

There are new EU-wide data regulations, known as the GDPR, that were introduced in 2018. These regulations allow people to make a data request, called a Subject Access Request, to any institution that holds any data on them. The definition of data is pretty broad, and I was able to ask my PhD college, and several other institutions, to see all emails in which my name appeared in either the subject line or the body of the email. While it may now be legal in the EU to request a copy of all emails that mention you by name, socially it would be a terrible betrayal of trust. Ironically, this seems like clear confirmatory evidence of the sort of red-flag behavior that would cause an advisor to send private emails strongly discouraging others from hiring you even if you were qualified on-paper for the position.

sct202 7y ago
That doesn't seem fair since the emails were sent long before the writer made the requests. If she had never asked for the emails, the same things would be said about her.
- nkurz 7y ago
  Sure, I don't mean that it was evidence at the time, rather that suspicions held by the advisor seem to have been proved true. I presume that advisor felt justified in warning others that the author might be a problematic hire, and a scandal like this is evidence that the suspicion was correct. I think the right question to ask is whether an advisor is obligated to give positive recommendations for an advisee if they come to regret having taken them on. My sense is that the advisor was correct to notice that socially something was "off" about the author, and correct that others might regret hiring her, just as he(?) had come to regret choosing her as a student. I don't know though whether it's legal under current EU law to act on these observations and experiences.

Singletoned 7y ago

As a fellow Aspy, I started reading this thinking, I bet he's a bit of a difficult person. Maybe an Aspy. > Where my personality was called into question perhaps my working-class background, my northern accent, and my Aspergers could be a reasonable explanation. Ah! Yes, I can guess which one of those three is the reason people found you difficult.

Circuits 7y ago
I don't know anyone with Asperger personally but based on my limited research and foreknowledge of the the condition I found it rather odd that the author would be surprised by any of this. I don't have Asperger's and even I wouldn't be surprised by any of this if it were to happen to me.
clavalle 7y ago
I know plenty of people on the spectrum that are pleasant to be around and work with. Engaging differently socially, while difficult in some sense, isn't necessarily unpleasant.
matthewowen 7y ago
As a working-class northerner, I can see the case for the other two :).
ggm 7y ago
I also suspect its the classic South/North Bias. The Watford and south mob simply cannot handle Geordie, or Scots. Good that we both got there.
neonate 7y ago
Probably a she? The author is listed as Dora B.

bryanrasmussen 7y ago

I actually think I've been "blacklisted" at a government agency in my country, or at least someone with hiring power must be working there who specifically does not want to hire me. Two reasons - 1. some years ago there was a job listing at the agency for a programmer with experience in a governmental specification that I was the technical guy in the working group that made the specification, for heavy experience in some technologies I am very good at, including some international standards in which I am thanked as one of the contributors to the standard and when I applied I got the standard reply some months later they went with someone more qualified which is their choice however I can say with 99.9% certainty there was only one other person in the country possibly more qualified than I am (given the technologies involved and the time) and he wasn't applying. 2. another time they put up a technical challenge and normally when I complete a technical challenge of the particular sort I did the potential employer likes to meet me (they put it online and said try to do this and see if you would be someone we might like to hire). And they said they decided to go with someone else but they did not have any comments on my technical challenge. So what I'm saying I would really like to get all details from any communications regarding possibly hiring me from that ministry because it might be interesting, but then again I am also of the kind of personality that it just might infuriate me - and what good is that?

sct202 7y ago
I don't know if your government is like my government, but a lot of the hiring decisions my government makes are often corrupt and based on X government leader owes Y person so this job will go to one of Y person's friends.
dahdum 7y ago
You could be right, but "more qualified" doesn't have to mean "technical expertise in this exact standard". They could easily be weighing factors such as previous leadership experience, team/group experience, stated career goals, stated interests, demeanor, or experience in other tangential technologies.
- bryanrasmussen 7y ago

turk73 7y ago

"You are ostracised and isolated. You muddle through, teaching on fixed-term, part-time, zero-hours contracts, a low-paid disposable commodity, writing papers, chapters and articles in what little spare time you have, and believing what you’ve been told, that success is based on merit, that talent is the most important thing, and that if you work hard and hang in there you’ll get there in the end." I know exactly how the system works in academia. Try being anything other than a Bolshevik and you quickly find out that the machine will identify you and terminate you via a subtle, imprecise but very effective means of shunning, avoidance, and other forms of covert hostility until you give up and go away. It is the same in the corporate world as well, just not fully activated there yet. Screw the small-minded people doing this. No matter your academic qualifications, what does it say about you as a human being if you can't understand and accept that other people have different ideas and different opinions and that they can't just be ignored or swept away just because you hold onto a bunch of foregone conclusions that you simply accept as right? That's never been right, not ever. Universities are supposed to be a marketplace of ideas but instead are conformity factories. I have this to say: That is an echo chamber and although people feel secure inside there and smug about it, all such echo chambers eventually end.

Grue3 7y ago

>I was able to ask my PhD college, and several other institutions, to see all emails in which my name appeared in either the subject line or the body of the email. The scariest part is that this is apparently possible in countries under the jurisdiction of GDPR now (and possibly even outside of it). Your private emails talking about a third party might be exposed at the request of the said third party. Does no one else consider this extremely concerning?

Silhouette 7y ago
There is certainly an ethical challenge in balancing privacy and data protection issues when there is more than one subject involved, as in this case with both the PhD graduate and those other parties whose emails referred to them. It seems a terrible precedent if any communications service may in general be required to disclose the otherwise private communications of its users if they happen to mention any individual by name (or, presumably, any other identifying features, since this is the GDPR). On the other hand, for matters of professional/business correspondence that relate to a specific individual, where the information being stored or shared around may be incorrect or misleading and the individual is being personally harmed as a result, isn't that exactly the sort of problem that data protection laws (and the anti-blacklisting laws, and defamation laws more generally, for that matter) are trying to fix? It doesn't make any practical difference whether the questionable personal data happens to be stored in something structured like a formal employee record or in unstructured form through emails shared by other staff. It's the data, how it's being used and who is using it that matter the most.
gota 7y ago
Regulations that are stronger than they should are made to be broken and circumvented. There's at least one likely future in which, following a couple multi-million lawsuit baseds on such requests, a kind of 'blind referencing' becomes the norm, taught and enforced by companies and organizations. "Never refer to individuals by name, use the Company Directory's Hash Function". Or something silly like that. Just like companies delete employees emails in the second they are allowed to do so by law - can you imagine if the law was to keep them forever? We'd have extreme changes in email formats and technology every decade or so, to render it impossible to read old-enough emails from disgruntled ex-employees and etc.

vectorEQ 7y ago

i feel for this person. my mother got blacklisted in her teaching profession, this stress triggered in her dormant traumas from her childhood, and she's been on medication now for 20 years due to these people pushing her over the edge with such behaviours. no matter how good you feel about yourself, give others a chance, even if they dont 'gel well with you'. don't feel 'threatened' by other people who are talented, feel graced by their wits and try to grow from them instead of kicking them down. lack of respect and integrity at its worst, it's an epidemic in our society.

crb002 7y ago

Victim of nasty blacklisting myself. My advise is to be way nicer and make far more friends in the industry than the blacklister. Especially if you are autistic spectrum, you need a good support network.

silveroriole 7y ago
In other words, the solution to someone thinking you’re unlikeable and hard to work with is to become more likeable? Who could have guessed ;)

ptaipale 7y ago

> "I was able to ask my PhD college, and several other institutions, to see all emails in which my name appeared ..." How are different people with the same name distinguished in these cases? Name might be (almost) unambiguous for some people, but lots of us have many, many namesakes. Is the institution required to reliably tell apart which of the messages were meaning the person making the information request, and which were talking about someone else? What are the penalties for leaking emails that were discussing someone else who has the same name?

BeetleB 7y ago

I think people should keep a few things in mind. First, we have only one side of the story. The claim is the advisor never spoke to her about the problems he had with her, and we shouldn't simply assume the claim is true. OTOH, I can easily believe it is, given my experience in grad school. While some professors were quite fussy about quality in the thesis, others accepted that most PhD's (in engineering) are not targeting scientific research after the degree, and lower the standards to allow them to graduate. But they absolutely will not support such people in getting a research position at a university or a government lab. Some are open about it: "If you're targeting research and want my recommendations for that endeavor, this is what you need to do. If not, then all you need is X, Y and Z." Unfortunately, not all advisors are as frank. Also keep in mind that the person may well have been a very competent researcher, while simultaneously being hard to work with. It's quite fair to point it out when asked, and it's quite fair to disrecommend someone because of it. I don't think the article presents any evidence of active blacklisting, where one is going out of their way to tell everyone (without solicitation) "Don't hire this person!" Finally, the real issue: What role should references play in the hiring process? I personally would love a world where we never rely on letters of recommendation and references - I think they are the weakest link in the hiring process. However, if we do accept references/letters of recommendation, then everything in the article is fair game. If you ever asked someone what they thought of a candidate before hiring them, you are part of the same culture that this person's advisor is.