Loading ...Unions accuse SOAS management of prejudice in sacking Stalin
Further details emerged this week in the case of Joseph Stalin Bermudez, whose dismissal from his SOAS postroom job has led to a ballot over strike action.
In a joint statement, SOAS UNISON and SOAS UCU said that the charges against Stalin had been exaggerated. They also accused SOAS management of wanting to return to the terrible state of industrial relations at the school at the end of 2005.
Supporters say Stalin has become a target because of his support for the ‘Justice for Cleaners’ campaign.
The statement said: “Stalin was absurdly accused by Sharon Page [SOAS registrar] of a perceived “threat to kill” a colleague in September 2008. In fact, the original complaint contains no such allegation.
“The perception explicitly relates to alleged “death threats” in 2007. Those allegations had been found to be “unfounded and unsubstantiated” in an earlier grievance hearing.”
The unions add that the evidence of a witness, Pablo Grisales, was mishandled: “Pablo was called into an intimidating meeting with three managers present and was read out a prepared statement which he was not shown and which he was asked to confirm.
“He was given no opportunity to qualify that statement or to provide his own independent statement of events.
“That unsigned “statement” then became the “witness statement”. No written report of that investigatory meeting was provided except for the manager’s file note.”
A later statement which Pablo gave in person to the disciplinary committee, supporting Stalin’s recollection of events, was dismissed as a fabrication.
“Prejudice can be the only explanation. To say that this borders on downright racism would be an understatement,” the unions’ statement added.
In addition to the ballot for industrial action, the unions have announced that an independent panel of professors will re-examine all available evidence and documentation.
That comes after claims that the appeal panel were hand-picked by SOAS management in order to ensure the original dismissal was not overturned.
SOAS Executive Board responded with an open letter to staff which said the disciplinary hearings had been conducted in line with procedures agreed with the unions.
”The School regrets the recent emails from UCU and UNISON representatives on the UCU email relay and would urge all to reconsider their stated intention to publish full documents relating to this case,” it added. “Such publication would be seriously prejudicial to the outcome of any further proceedings as well as a breach of the School’s disciplinary procedures as agreed with both campus trade unions.
“The School denies claims and suggestions that the former member of staff was dismissed for his trade union activities and views the decision of UNISON to ballot on industrial action on this basis as wholly inappropriate. No complaints have made about alleged victimisation on the grounds of trade union activity.
“The School has no wish to return to the difficult industrial relations of the past and we wish to engage constructively with our trade union colleagues in a respectful manner and in the interests of all parties and the wider School community.”
