Abuse of power, transgressive behavior ‘with a sexual intimidation component’, gender discrimination, systematically denigrating and belittling people and ‘undesirable physical treatment’ of one of his employees. The list of cases of which a professor at Leiden University has been guilty, according to an internal investigation, is long. Moreover, the behavior has been able to take place for years. Only after the dean had heard about complaints from four female employees did an independent complaints committee of the university start an investigation.
“I’m making no bones about it: the institute should have seen this sooner and action should have been taken sooner,” said the chair of the Executive Board Annetje Ottow to the university magazine last Tuesday. mare after the news came out. “He will never be welcome at this university again.”
The incident illustrates the problems organizations face when an employee has misbehaved in an unacceptable way. No sector escapes the dance. From political parties to media companies, and from sports organizations to the entertainment industry, it’s everywhere. Even in that remotely impeccable academic world.
In practice, transgressive behavior by employees quickly degenerates into an ethical and legal tug-of-war. For example, on the day Leiden University released the news about their professor, the top of the Labor Party was reprimanded by its own appeal committee for their actions in Gijs van Dijk’s case. There were also reports of transgressive behavior that had been confirmed by a commission of inquiry. However, the public reprimand that followed was too severe a sanction, according to the appeals committee.
‘naming and shaming’
While Van Dijk’s name was too soon on the street, the Leiden professor’s refusal to name a name is the main point of criticism. Even after it was revealed that he was a professor at the Astronomical Institute, both the Astronomy Department and the Executive Board declined to confirm this after questions from this newspaper. And that while there is plenty of evidence: several astronomers from the university had already confirmed it and it was circulating https://twitter.com/frogs4girls/status/1582385219222794241?s=20&t=_cBq2u9lGof-V9NzULYfPg of the internal e-mail that the institute director sent to his employees on this subject.
The fact that the university is not disclosing the name is due to privacy legislation, says Caroline van Overbeeke, spokesperson for the Executive Board. ‘It obliges us as an employer not to disclose this kind of information about an employee.’
Naming and shaming is a heavy means and dismissal is the superlative. ‘You have to be able to substantiate that,’ says Evert Verhulp, professor of employment law at the University of Amsterdam. At the same time, transgressive behaviour, certainly with a sexual component, is serious enough. ‘From a legal point of view, the university could have opted for dismissal and disclosure of the name’, he judges.
Professor of astronomy Ralph Wijers of the University of Amsterdam is surprised that his colleagues in Leiden have not done so. “Everyone in the astronomy world is shocked, angry and also frustrated by this case,” he says. ‘I don’t understand this about Leiden University.’
His fellow professor Sera Markoff of the University of Amsterdam shares this view. ‘The Netherlands is internationally known for being progressive in the field of social responsibility and liability,’ she says. She refers to the concrete policy proposals that the Dutch academic world has made to improve social safety at universities. “Now that something happens that actually puts those recommendations to the test, we shouldn’t resort to legal prohibitions on disclosing employees. This feels like a missed opportunity.’
Ethical reasons
According to professor of astronomy Anna Watts, also affiliated with the University of Amsterdam, there are many ethical reasons for going public with the name. For example, the astronomical institute in Leiden has roughly fifteen male professors. ‘Due to the secrecy, everyone is suddenly suspicious,’ she says.
Astronomer Christoph Keller, who works at Leiden University, among others, therefore felt the need to provide clarity on social media. “If you’re wondering if I’m the professor who got kicked out, it’s not me,” https://twitter.com/KellerCU/status/1583143698434379776?s=20&t=_cBq2u9lGof-V9NzULYfPg.
The same day the university released the news of the transgression, Keller was told by astronomer friends that he was one of the two prime suspects in the gossip circuit. ‘I hadn’t changed anything on the Leiden computer servers in the months after the university started its research into this professor,’ he says. That was not because he was denied access to those servers, but because he had a new job in the United States from the beginning of 2022 and had been less and less in Leiden since that time. He was only visiting professor there, a position without salary.
“The timeline seemed to be just right,” he says. ‘After seeing a significant increase in visits to my social media profiles, especially from Dutch universities and journalists, I thought it wise to proactively clear my name,’ he says. He also thinks that the university should publish the name. “It will come out sooner or later. You won’t help anyone with this.’
Take revenge
As long as the name of the professor is not known, there is a risk that he can continue to do his thing elsewhere. ‘Science is international’, says Watts. ‘Each of us has multiple functions. We are on the editorial boards of professional journals, on the committees that have to assess research proposals and we are active in international trade associations and partnerships.’
Although one name is now emphatically circulating as the main suspect, that is insufficient, says Wijers, among others. “I’ve been the director of our astronomical institute in the past and in that role I would also have wondered how I could have protected my people as best as possible outside the university,” he says. ‘You cannot rule out the possibility that this professor will soon take revenge from his other positions.’
People who display this kind of behavior are often powerful. Take the case of astronomer Christian Ott, who was forced to leave Caltech University in 2018 after harassing female employees. Researchers from his network then wrote letters recommending him to other institutes, Wijers says.
‘I know more examples of people for whom professional friends put in a good word after similar cases,’ he says. ‘I always call that the Catholic solution somewhat derisively. I sometimes worry about how we can banish that practice in our own field.’
Shortly after his departure from the United States, Ott was offered a new position at the Finnish University of Turku. Only after persistent criticism from colleagues, possibly because his name was on the street, did the university decide to undo this.
When asked whether the university should protect the wider scientific community against this professor, the Executive Board responds in the negative. ‘We have a responsibility for our own university and our own employees’, says spokesman Van Overbeeke. ‘We have no influence on what happens elsewhere, no matter how powerless it feels. We understand these kinds of reactions, but purity only compels us to judge complaints at our university.’
Wijers calls this a very narrow interpretation. ‘Normally, as a science we are proud of all our international connections. Then you also have to recognize how ramified the network of experienced researchers is’, he says. ‘I understand that you keep things like this under wraps while the investigation is ongoing, but after that your responsibility really extends beyond your own institution.’
According to Van Overbeeke, it should not be forgotten that there are also advantages to protecting the professor’s privacy. ‘You also limit the damage, which is already great for everyone involved, including the complainants, the institute involved and, last but not least, the university.’
Retaining professor’s salary
In addition to the secrecy, the chosen penalty can also count on strong criticism. In practice, the ‘never welcome again’ from the Executive Board does not mean dismissal. The management only denied the professor access to their own buildings. This goes beyond the physical, for example, the man is no longer allowed to contact his Leiden colleagues outside the university, but that’s where it ends. He will retain his professor’s salary and the right to publish research with the university as an official affiliation.
Watts can count on little understanding for that decision. “I was dumbfounded,” she says. ‘As a professor, I myself am judged on my leadership qualities, on my role as a mentor, on the level of my education and on my personal integrity. If you fail to do that, or if you are no longer allowed to perform some of those tasks, then in my opinion it is impossible to remain a professor.’
Van Overbeeke nevertheless calls the measure taken robust. ‘Such a person ends up in isolation. Science is a team sport, so there are many obstacles for those involved.’ She emphasizes that the university’s decision was ‘made very carefully’, taking into account multiple arguments and considerations. She cannot go into details about this, because that would violate privacy.
However, employment law expert Verhulp has a suspicion. ‘With such solid facts, you usually only waive dismissal when someone is already close to retirement,’ he says. ‘For a few months’ salary, even at professor level, it simply isn’t worth litigating anymore.’
Contact the author of this article? [email protected]
Tags: Professor misbehaves Leiden University years board reveal
