As Prof Evans is in the middle of giving evidence, he may not comment. Once his cross-examination is over, a factual transcript of the events on Monday & Tuesday from a note-taker at the Tribunal will be available. We expect this to be ready by Tuesday evening.
Anyone is welcome to make factual comments on the proceedings of the Tribunal. This is the principle of Open Justice. Comments such as “Prof Evans alleged …” or “The Respondent’s Barrister claimed …” are perfectly fine. Please avoid any personal comments.
The witness statements will be made available electronically at 10.00 am on Tuesday morning.
The document bundle will be made available tomorrow. Given the size of the bundle, it will be split into further files and it will be ready for Wednesday 10.00 am.
Many thanks for following the Tribunal and all your support.
This is riveting: first time someone has decided to take on the injustice of Cambridge HR. Recommended viewing
Has it started? I’ve just got a blank screen
Has it started? I’ve got a blank screen
Good luck for day 2, Wyn.
As you know, there are many people cheering and supporting you in the background, not least all those whose voices were overlooked or silenced by the University.
Hang in on there because you are not alone!
Well said – staff treatment by some senior staff, and management of staff and investigations, where needed, has to improve and in some places be reset completely. This hearing will be hugely beneficial for the higher education sector
Following you every day Professor. It is distressing for us too when something becomes emotional. We feel it too.
We believe you. We support you. We are proud of you. Don’t ever think that it is not worth it because you are helping many of us at national level. THANK YOU.
Wyn, you are our hero. Academics are not known for their courage. We need more people like you in British academia who stand up for vulnerable colleagues and speak up when they see something that is not right. With strong support networks we would never need to rely on HR or courts to see that all women and men are treated fairly and afforded the same fundamental rights.
It is clear, not only from the post and comments in this blog, but also from a wide variety of recent Employment Tribunal cases, that something is deeply wrong in how our higher education sector operates, in particular in the treatment of younger and more at-risk staff. I give as only three recent examples the “sham contract” case recently won at Oxford ET (https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/feb/21/academics-win-claim-against-oxford-university-over-sham-contracts), the QMUL “salary docking” case recently won in the London tribunal (https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/queen-mary-staff-allowed-challenge-marking-boycott-pay-cuts), and Professor Manuel Graeber’s victory against Imperial over whistleblower retaliation. There is a culture of mistreatment of less senior colleagues and clear hierarchy of power in who is protected and who is not, and frankly, no other sector operates in quite the same manner.
I can tell you that certainly for the London universities the Graeber case was crucial. Wthout it that would have sent a chilling message to anyone considering exercising their rights. But to their credit Oxford also reformed a lot after the EJRA and “deliveroo” salary controversies (even if it appears that they still have work to do on sexual harassment). And do not forget the big freedom of speech cases where universities wrongfully dismissed faculty for their outsider gender and political views. Those, too, have resulted in better protection for viewpoint diversity, much to the benefit of our society. Finally let’s not forget the parliamentary hearings on Dundee financial management. It is perhaps too soon to say if that resulted in change, but I can only think it sent a message that managers must perform due diligence.
There is certainly something amiss in the HE sector and I don’t know why it gets overlooked. In any public company accountable to shareholders standards would be upheld because any chief executive or board member knows they are out the moment there is even a hint of public scandal or failure of due diligence in their role as we have seen with Cardiff and Dundee. I have no idea why universities are not subject to the same professional standards – after all, unlike with the NHS or civil service, managerial salaries now approximate or even exceed equivalent private sector roles.
Wyn: thank you for carrying this burden on your shoulders and not letting them break you. This is what courage looks like. We are all stronger because you have lifted us higher.
I second this.
It really shows how a kind professor is a person who has a lifetime of students and former colleagues who remember their warn deeds — and are ready to lean in and help. No-one should ever be made to go through this kind of hardship. Least of all because they were a good person. It is the same goodness that made a person a wonderful teacher, mentor and co-researcher in the first place.
What a madness we have descended into.
A teacher is a person who retires poor in wealth, but rich in the knowledge of the careers that they helped to foster, and the minds and souls they nurtured. A teacher sleeps soundly at night in the comfort of this silent strength, even whilst never being able to see their impact in their conscious daily life.
By contrast a lawyer retires rich in wealth, but at the poverty of their soul. They live unaware of the lives they brought to ruin, and the damage their actions have had. As the final hour comes, they must sleep ever more restlessly each passing night, haunted by the rising wail of their extant ghosts.
This gladiator has learned from several attendants the disgusting tactics being used by the UCam team: an assault on Wyn Evans integrity! It will fail!
We are all Wyn Evans. The same experiences, and the exact same battle. 3,726 of us voted for him in the Chancellorship race last year on anti-bullying platform for the exact same reason – we are tired of how the cartel is treating us and desperate for change.