Life goes on, research is done but a break from the Katie saga is welcome.

Miss Ultra competitive (sorry thats DOCTOR ultra-competitive to you)rocked up to my office yesterday morning in a state of absolute fury.

The PI has basically gone back to his visiting professorship and has left me in charge. As a result I have to sign off any major expenditures and deal with budgeting issues. This means allocating cash for who goes on conferences. The way I am working it is that people who havent gone recently get priority, AND Phders get a shot at funds IF they have secured some funding from other sources (e.g. awards etc). One of my new suggestions to encourage the PhDers. However, this means that there isnt enough to let Miss UC go along this time (she went last year).

So, she basically goes for the jugular. (How dare I exclude her/ Who do I think I am/ I just arrived and am already...). I stare her down and reply "Unless you don't want to go next year, I would suggest you calm down". She flushes red and storms out saying "you havent heard the end of this".

According to Sabrina (almost hero-worshiping me since the whole Katy debacle) Ms UC was muttering dark things in the canteen, but it looks like I need to keep an eye on things.

Anyone out there got some pointers around this kind of thing?

Hi BHC, thanks for the latest installment - we could have the first academia sit-com/soap being penned! Seriously tho, remind me what Dr Competitive does - is she a lecturer? (Your other thread was removed so I can't remember) If so, does she not hold her own budget anyway?

With regard to your way of allocating funds, it sounds fair to me, but does the uni have guidelines on this? I know that ours stated certain amounts for each person. PhDs had a set sum for an international conference(usually 3rd year), but they also had to look for other sources. I think it would help you to see if there are any uni rules that apply to conference funding, so you can demonstrate you're working within agreed remits. Personally I think while it's great that the PI has left you in charge, funding allocation is a big responsibility to have*. Where where I've been it was always a Prof who held the purse strings, even if their expertise was in a different area.

* note: I'm NOT saying you're not up to it, BTW

Latest installment. Katie strikes back! Darth Vader Returns!

The office of independent adjudication is getting involved after Katie went to them. She is citing "inadequate supervision" and "extenuating circumstances" and "harrassment". There is also stuff about plagiarism which is going to be impossible to prove.

So guess who has to give up his weekend to start going through the various documents and statements? Its ME! I am no judge judy, but even I can see that half the stuff is circumstantial and is the sort of "He said-she said" type of evidence. In scientific terms most of it would be considered non-falsifiable, and impossible to prove or disprove.

Added to this Ms UberCompetitive is making things a million times worse by going on the offensive and writing emails to Katie that border on death threats, which give Katie the ammunition to use against us. Halfway through yesterday I honestly had the thought that Ms UC was paid by Katie to sabotage our defence.

This could seriously impact on the lab and we could get shut down. The remaining PhDers and postdogs are bouncing around in fear. Ms UC thinks she is Winston Churchill fighting the third reich, and I have to keep everything together as my boss is only back in August.

However, under my new resolution to look on the positive side, I have had some very good comments about one of the papers submitted from my PhD, so looks like another potential publication is on the horizon.

This is one to keep your HoD fully informed on - it's his/her problem ultimately and he/she needs to jump on the idiot sending threatening e-mails like a ton of bricks. I'd pass the buck along with the documents firmly upwards - the university will have a lawyer and that's what they're for. One fairly obvious point though that might save you some time: has she exhausted the university's internal complaints process? If so all this stuff should be on file with the REgistrar's student disciplinary team. If she hasn't then I think that the ombudsman will throw it straight out if you tell them this. they're meant to be last not first step of a complaint.

yikes! creepy story, only just read it. am happy that i'm paranoid and lock my computer every time i'm out...

but BHC, you had better mail your HoD about this (especially the evil mailer). otherwise you'll be the one who'll bleed if it all goes pear-shaped.... she'll stop mailing if her boss tells her to.

wow that is unbelievable, that there are people like Katy out there in the academic world. really helps to put things into perspective doesnt it! yikes!! if she really did delete that poor girls lit review, that is just EVIL.

and cant believe the allegations she threw back at you! wow this really is high drama!!

I hope it all works out, and I believe that people like this always get it back, karma and all that! what goes around comes around, eventually.

i hope eventually truth and justice will prevail!

Head of Dept knows all about it, but is currently stateside (he is a visiting professor over there). He has basically told me to "Do what I need to do", and he will back me up all the way. Aint Skype wonderful.

I am having a 9am meeting with Ms UberCompetitive to chew her out over sending the threats. I have been thinking over the unpleasent possibility this weekend that I may actually have to launch a disciplinary investigatio against her or send some of it onto the cops as it is rather intimidating.

If I don't and Katy retaliates and cites it, I too will be in the firing line.

Moral of the story, don't write down ANYTHING that could be considered harassing. Even to vent or in jest.

With the ubercompetitive one I'd get some advice from either HR or student disciplinary office on what procedures to follow. They should know and if nothing else if you do what they say then you've also covered your own back. Also are you in UCU? If so, it might be worth getting some advice from them as it sounds like your boss and your HoD are treating you extremely unfairly in not handing the problem over to someone higher up - might be good to call in some support and information from the union.

In case anyone ever wondered what happened.

We had the first meeting last week. Its my first real experience of being in an official investigation (for a crime we didn't commit like the A-team). What subsequently transpired could be equated to a farce crossed with an episode of Boston Law.

Sat around a group meeting room, Katy had her NUS representative, her Lawyer and another couple of people who I didn't understand their role was. On my side there was my PI, me (Ms Ubercompetitive has left long ago), Sabrina and two other PhDers and another old timer Postdoc. We had a university administrator/representative on our side, who honestly was as much use as tits on a fish. Half stuttering, unable to read lines from a piece of paper and quick to fold under the slightest challenge she was one of the worst aspects of the entire experience. The independent investigator, some other people and a chairperson presided (who was more used to collegial discussions rather than adverserial interrogation).

We kicked off by explaining the situation and how basically Katy had acted completely out of hand. Thanks to some meticulous paperwork on my part and Sabrinas we were able to present a fairly solid account of the events that took place.

Katy then came back with a spectacular fabrication that said
- She was told to do it by the PI.
- She was bullied by Sabrina, Dr UC, me, the rest of the team, the university, everyone ever in higher education, the universe and everyone reading this on this board.
- Dr UC had threatened her.
- She hadn't done anything wrong really.
- She was suing us for all the distress and wrongful things we had done to her.

We had to disprove all the things she alleged (Karl Popper knows nothing, you can disprove a negative).

Back and forth it raged, she did this, we said that. It lasted an afternoon but felt like a lifetime. Then again 3 days later with additional evidence and allegations. In the end we got the outcome we wanted (ie. Katy didn't have a leg to stand on). The thing we got told off for was Dr UCs almost sabotaging emails, which almost swung the case towards Katy.

Regardless to say Katy is going to appeal. Lets see what happens.

======= Date Modified 13 May 2009 09:50:23 =======
i know i'm missing the point completely and i know this isn't funny, but:



'for a crime we didn't commit like the A-team' lol!



and 'as mcuh use as tits on a fish' hehe, that's a good one.