3 ms·

Suing the university that gave her a PhD and publicly shaming her adviser: I guess she never wants an academic job ever. I’m actually surprised she got the degr

Suing the university that gave her a PhD and publicly shaming her adviser: I guess she never wants an academic job ever. I’m actually surprised she got the degree after filing all of those complaints, usually they can figure out a way to make you go away.

bonoboTP 7y ago
You mean most potential academic employers would rather have their employees cover up scientific fraud? That's quite a low opinion on academia.
- labster 7y ago
  No I mean most large corporations would rather have employees that don't have a history of suing similar large corporations for damages incurred after whistleblowing. It's only a little worse in universities compared to other faceless corporations because the fields are so small and so much of an academic career is built on reputation. You're starting from the assumption that the allegations are true. But if you're inside the field, you know the professor, go to conferences with him... At some point, the department has to decide if you want to hire a troublemaker, and then actually go to bat for them with the administration who will look at the hire as a business risk.
  - m00x 7y ago
    Hiring someone with a reputation of standing up for proper academic conduct would signal to the outside world that you have nothing to hide and that you also stand for those values. This isn't a troublemaker, this is a proper academic who knows the importance of protocol and scientific process.
    - CrendKing 7y ago
      The choice between 1) maintaining status quo, and 2) losing one or more professors who are bringing money in, if we push through the charges, for potential reputation gain. I think most business administrator would choose former.
      - bonoboTP 7y ago
        I see that can be so in the US where hiring decisions seem to be more business oriented. Not sure if it works like that in every country. In Germany, professors have great freedom in choosing who to hire. For example phd student applicants directly contact and interview with the prof. Probably there is some form of veto from above though, but rarely exercised.
    - philipov 7y ago
      > signal to the outside world that you have nothing to hide This only matters if the outside cares very deeply about that, which it doesn't seem to, not enough to outweigh the benefit of not having to deal with incidents in the first place. You have to consider the real opportunity cost: signalling is less effective than silence.
    - labster 7y ago
      Yes, and if academia was a fantasy land where everyone worked with the proper scientific process as a goal and no one needed more grant funding this would be great. I've gotten a lot of downvotes, and I'm not really sure why. This isn't my opinion of how things should be, it's based on what I observed in university. I knew a guy who tried the suing the university for messing up his graduate education thing -- life did not turn out well for him. The highest paid state employees are college football coaches, because they make the most money. Funds that used to help professors are pouring into middle management and image consultants. Modern universities are run with all of the techniques and moral flexibility of multinational corporations, and no amount of downvotes will change that.
dekhn 7y ago
it's truly hard to know how this will affect her career. If the lawsuit is successful and she proves she was a valid whistleblower with a legitimate claim, some employers may consider that a sign she is a high-integrity researcher. But more hiring managers or deans would just see the whistleblowing as a proxy metric of difficulty to work with.

bonoboTP 7y ago

You mean most potential academic employers would rather have their employees cover up scientific fraud? That's quite a low opinion on academia.

labster 7y ago
No I mean most large corporations would rather have employees that don't have a history of suing similar large corporations for damages incurred after whistleblowing. It's only a little worse in universities compared to other faceless corporations because the fields are so small and so much of an academic career is built on reputation. You're starting from the assumption that the allegations are true. But if you're inside the field, you know the professor, go to conferences with him... At some point, the department has to decide if you want to hire a troublemaker, and then actually go to bat for them with the administration who will look at the hire as a business risk.
- m00x 7y ago
  Hiring someone with a reputation of standing up for proper academic conduct would signal to the outside world that you have nothing to hide and that you also stand for those values. This isn't a troublemaker, this is a proper academic who knows the importance of protocol and scientific process.
  - CrendKing 7y ago
    The choice between 1) maintaining status quo, and 2) losing one or more professors who are bringing money in, if we push through the charges, for potential reputation gain. I think most business administrator would choose former.
    - bonoboTP 7y ago
      I see that can be so in the US where hiring decisions seem to be more business oriented. Not sure if it works like that in every country. In Germany, professors have great freedom in choosing who to hire. For example phd student applicants directly contact and interview with the prof. Probably there is some form of veto from above though, but rarely exercised.
  - philipov 7y ago
    > signal to the outside world that you have nothing to hide This only matters if the outside cares very deeply about that, which it doesn't seem to, not enough to outweigh the benefit of not having to deal with incidents in the first place. You have to consider the real opportunity cost: signalling is less effective than silence.
  - labster 7y ago
    Yes, and if academia was a fantasy land where everyone worked with the proper scientific process as a goal and no one needed more grant funding this would be great. I've gotten a lot of downvotes, and I'm not really sure why. This isn't my opinion of how things should be, it's based on what I observed in university. I knew a guy who tried the suing the university for messing up his graduate education thing -- life did not turn out well for him. The highest paid state employees are college football coaches, because they make the most money. Funds that used to help professors are pouring into middle management and image consultants. Modern universities are run with all of the techniques and moral flexibility of multinational corporations, and no amount of downvotes will change that.

dekhn 7y ago

it's truly hard to know how this will affect her career. If the lawsuit is successful and she proves she was a valid whistleblower with a legitimate claim, some employers may consider that a sign she is a high-integrity researcher. But more hiring managers or deans would just see the whistleblowing as a proxy metric of difficulty to work with.