Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
1–10 of 55 posts
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#2[deleted]
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#3If a top scientist loses a grant, science loses.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#4If a top scientist loses a grant, science loses.
The money from the Wellcome Trust will undoubtedly still be funding cancer research, it just won't have a bully at the head.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#5If a top scientist loses a grant, science loses.
If a top scientist bullies many other scientists working under them and drives them away from their field, leading to fewer great minds working on important problems (like cancer research), science loses far more in the long term than if one scientist loses a grant (that presumably is now going to another scientist working on cancer research).
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#6If a top scientist loses a grant, science loses.
A top scientist working with cancer research, losing a grant because of bullying.
Someone must have some really twisted priorities to consider cancer research so meaningless.
Sure, the bully should get corrected, but through normal corrective measure such as calling her in for a meeting. This is just absurd.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#7If a top scientist loses a grant, science loses.
Are you saying that the ends justify the means? I think that's a dangerous frame of mind. Do you think these scientists will be putting their best work forward in a hostile work environment? Do you think they will have enough mental capital to focus on doing good science when they are spending part of that mental load on worrying about being bullied?
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#8Hopefully the institution will support Mrs Rahnan's graduate students, postdocs and technicians. Not only did they suffer while working with an abusive advisor, they are suffering again because a lot of funding went away.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#9If a top scientist loses a grant, science loses.
A top scientist working with cancer research, losing a grant because of bullying . Someone must have some really twisted priorities to consider cancer research so meaningless. Sure, the bully should get corrected, but through normal corrective measure such as calling her in for a meeting . This is just absurd.
Sure, the bully should get corrected, but through normal corrective measure such as calling her in for a meeting. This is just absurd.
The only thing that works is meaningful consequences. This includes consequences for the institution - it's clear that there was a litany of complaints about the person, all of which went unheeded.
Re: Top geneticist loses 3.5M grant in first test of landmark bullying policy
#10If a top scientist loses a grant, science loses.
A top scientist working with cancer research, losing a grant because of bullying . Someone must have some really twisted priorities to consider cancer research so meaningless. Sure, the bully should get corrected, but through normal corrective measure such as calling her in for a meeting . This is just absurd.
>call her in for a meeting
A meeting? Like a disciplinary hearing?
>the ICR’s independent investigation deemed some of the allegations serious enough to warrant consideration at a disciplinary hearing”. However, Rahman resigned and the disciplinary hearing did not take place.