Bullying at the University of Newcastle (Australia)

We are working to highlight and stop academic workplace bullying at the University of Newcastle, Australia. We are a group of staff and students who have been bullied for speaking out about misconduct.

Help make a difference –

*answer our survey,

*contribute to the blog, or

*contact us.

This will help us gather as much information as possible so that we can put an end to this bullying with its’ decades-long history.

“Systemic bullying, hazing and abuse generally are identified with poor, weak or toxic organizational cultures. Cultures that are toxic have stated ethical values that are espoused but not employed, and other non-ethical values which are operational, dominant, but unstated.

Such cultures thrive when good people are silent, silenced, or pushed out; when bad apples are vocal, retained, promoted, and empowered; and when the neutral majority remain silent in order to survive. Those who are most successful in such a toxic culture are those who have adapted to it, or adopted it as their own”. (McKay, Arnold, Fratzl & Thomas, 2008)

Monday, March 23, 2015

David Yamada writes

"One of my central observations is that many of the "best" workplace abusers -- the ones who get their prey and continually evade being held responsible -- are calculating, committed, and smart planners. With task-oriented surgical precision and detachment, they plot and scheme. Like the serial killer who manages to escape capture, they're usually a step or three ahead of everyone else.
Some enable themselves by occupying positions where they can devote "quality time" to planning. While others do real work or otherwise conduct their lives, the expert bullies use chunks of time to assess and strategize, often obsessively so. They also find ways to access, control, and manipulate information and resources to which others, especially their targets, are not privy. This means, of course, that they need organizational sponsors who enable them or at least let them have free reign."
Does this sound familiar to those of you harassed, bullied and ostracised by staff at the University of Newcastle?
Power-hungry staff who will use and abuse anyone who gets in their way to the top.
Power-hungry staff who know the other power-hungry staff who will collude together to destroy anyone who gets in their way.


  1. The trouble is once a sociopath comfortably assumes leadership that pretty much spells the end of the organisation as a functional entity. They also attract other sociopaths.

    What surprises decent people is their lack of awareness with the so called leader's true ambition. They want total and unrelenting destruction and eventually self destruction.

    If a mammal gets an infection in the brain it usually means the body has become weak enough to allow it.

    In the case of the University of Newcastle their are still some astonishingly good individual talents still there but the institution as a whole is completely finished.

    The collective strength of the organisation doesn't exist. I don't care how many times on the radio how great the great hall is at the University.

    We have to face the fact that the current system has collapsed.

    The University of Sydney was worried about the decline of standards after the University ever since it became autonomous. They were right.

    People are what should matter at a University. People no longer matter there, as sociopaths never value or honour others.

    It is an agony to watch the loss of potential and disadvantage the institution is creating but there is nothing the public can do.

    The University will always attack the messenger or readily blame someone else for its own failure.

    Asking a sociopath to assume responsibility is a bit like talking to a pail of sand. You might be waiting a long time for an answer that means anything like a human's.

  2. For one of head of school, their cyberstalking and constant search for information to undermine others meant that he neglected his duty as a leader. The faculty has been flatlining for over four years now.

    The highly paranoid and aggressive individual seems more concerned with structure and discipline than actually what he is being paid to do.

    If you read anything by him you will amazed at how little of what he writes actually pertains to the subject he is apparently a professor of. There are citations of collaborative opportunities via technology and innovation but no actual examples.

    Did I mention how he hasn't published any research or have a PhD? People avoid this guy like the plague professionally because he is trouble.

    Four years of nothing is a long time for a faculty to sit and twirl its thumbs. There are no examples anywhere of any real productivity other than his constant lies and blaming of others.

    My question to you, the public is

    Is this good enough?