Administration

When I learned about my termination, I involved Dr. Steven Dew (VP Academic). My goal was have them investigate and reverse Tykwinski‘s wrongdoing before things escalated.

A department Chair is the lowest level administrator at a university. Tykwinski was a department Chair. Tykwinski had been a department Chair for less than six months. I assumed that senior administration would be a “sober second thought” on rash decisions made by new administrators. I was wrong. Dew immediately took Tykwinski‘s side. Dew and the University of Alberta then began covering-up Tykwinski‘s wrongdoing. As detailed herein, the University denied any wrongdoing, failed to conduct an independent investigation, lied to the AASUA, and threatened legal action to suppress the issue. The University continues to threaten legal action. The University breached policy, process, and statutes to cover-up Tykwinski‘s wrongdoing.

I later discovered that UAlberta has a reputation for covering-up research faculty wrongdoing. The Tykwinski debacle is the second known instance of administrative cover-up and corruption in recent times. How many were never made public? The connection between the cover-ups: Dew.

Investigating Tykwinski

I submitted a multi-faceted complaint regarding Tykwinski to Dew.

1. The University and AASUA have a list of “approved investigators”. Hopper is not on that list.
2. Hopper spent much of the first page of her report explaining how she was independent. Her arguments amount to pleas for me to believe her when she said she was independent and a reasonable selection.
3. Hopper met with Tykwinski, but never met with me. I did not have the same opportunity as Tykwinski to present evidence and counter evidence presented by others. Her conclusions indicate she accepted Tykwinski‘s lies.
4. Hopper dismissed several aspects of my complaint against Tykwinski without investigating them. Notably, she dismissed the aspects that she would have had the most difficulty justifying as reasonable conduct by Tykwinski. Convenient when you are perpetuating a cover-up.
5. The hiring policy states that the University hires based on merit. To dismiss my complaint about Tykwinski‘s hiring, Hopper redefines “merit” as “having the minimum qualifications”. What! Why does the University search the globe for research faculty, when anyone with a PhD has the minimum qualifications to be a researcher?
6. Some of the instructors Tykwinski considered and hired were foreign nationals. Tykwinski failed to follow University policy and federal legislation when considering and hiring foreign nationals. I still don’t understand Hopper‘s convoluted explanation why Tykwinski didn’t break the law. Probably because her arguments are garbage and Tykwinski broke the law.

Montemagno debacle

A few years before Tykwinski was the Montemagno debacle. Dew was the VP Academic when the University tried to cover-up Montemagno‘s wrongdoing.

The Montemagno debacle relates to nepotistic hiring. Montemagno hired his daughter and her husband to work in his research laboratory without following the proper hiring process. The University repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. Then when the story hit the media, the University did a complete reversal and publicly admitted misconduct by Montemagno and by the University with the cover-up. In a press release, the University stated,

“Had [the University] received a complaint about this at any time while Montemagno was employed here, it would have been fully investigated. … We take these matters seriously, and to ensure a situation like this doesn’t happen again, …. The University commits to openness, fairness, and transparency with future complaints.”

The Tykwinski debacle started just as the Montemagno debacle was ending. The above press release should have been fresh in the minds of University Administration. Yet instead of fully investigating my complaint in an open, fair, and transparent manner, the University again aggressively denied wrongdoing, failed to conduct an independent investigation, and threatened legal action to suppress the issue. Textbook corruption. Textbook hypocrisy.

Comparing the Montemagno and Tykwinski debacles

The Montemagno debacle pertains only to improper hiring. The Tykwinski debacle involves improper hiring, failed and improper investigations, improper termination, defamation, and the failed instruction of thousands of students.

• Tykwinski committed more breaches and more severe breaches than Montemagno.
• Tykwinski’s actions breached provincial and federal statutes; Montemagno’s did not.
• Tykwinski’s actions hurt existing employees; Montemagno’s did not.
• Tykwinski’s actions hurt thousands of students; Montemagno’s did not.
• Tykwinski’s actions cost the University taxpayer money; Montemagno’s did not.

Tykwinski’s misconduct is magnitudes worse than Montemagno’s. Tykwinski breached the Collective Agreement, University policies, provincial and federal statutes, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. UAlberta Administration is complicit by enabling, assisting, and aggressively covering-up Tykwinski‘s wrongdoing.

For at least the second time in a few years, Dew breached policy and process to defend a research faculty member from legitimate complaints of gross misconduct. How many issues did UAlberta successfully cover-up?

Current administration

Dr. Verna Viu (VP Academic) and Brad Hamdon (Counsel) of the current UAlberta Administration were provided with advanced access to this website. The hope was that they would address the gross misconduct by former administrators and engage in a restorative justice process. Unfortunately, the University response was to dismiss these issues as closed. They referenced old letters that “closed” these issues before I received all the information and threatened legal action against me if I went public with the information. How convenient. Zero honesty. Zero integrity. Zero openness. Zero transparency. The current administration is perpetuating the cover-up of gross misconduct. Viu and Hamdon are a disgrace.

After this website went public, UAlberta Administration has repeatedly threatened legal action. They have escalated to demanding my address so they can serve me court papers. Their primary accusation is that this website is defamatory. I have repeatedly reminded them that truth is a defence against defamation, and repeatedly requested they identify any incorrect information on this website. I want this website to be truthful! I have promised to investigate and correct any incorrect information, but they have not identified any.

Their repeated threats of legal action are textbook reprisal.

UAlberta administration is not open, not honest, not transparent, and not impartial. They suppress complaints and oppress complainants, which is not in the best interests of students, honest faculty and staff, the University, and society.