These people turned out to be unable to stand up to their own deed.
On 06 Feb'17 in Barcelona there was a conciliation meeting with the CRG's legal representative about legitimacy of a computer scientist's dismissal from this Spanish research institution.
CRG's legal representative was a young girl from a lawyer firm, so they decided to spend money for the legal service, having their own legal department.
This girl has burst into tears after being told off by the official in the conciliation office (Department de Treball, Afers Socials i Families, Generalitat de Catalunya).
She had nothing to do with these people and she took it hard.
Conciliation officer (Maria Bachs) told that she met such disrespect the first time in her practice: when a public organization (scientific one!) which can't help admitting the breach of the law is so disrespectful to it, also clearly demonstrating no care about its public reputation and lack of responsibility.
So unless the following is signs of corruption and rogue science, there should be another reasonable explanation.
They had to admit that the dismissal was illegal, but they said that they want to bring the case to the Court because they are «accountable for the money».
How is it consistent with the payment to the off-site company for a legal service, having it their own on site?
But there were a lot of weird inconsistencies in this case, please see below.
- A year ago they ignored conciliation officer's suggestion to accept that the dismissal was illegal and make things done: i.e. to pay out a small fine (~ one month wage) to me and give me a paper confirming that dismissal was illegal, their representative also told then that they need the decision of the Court to make that small payment.
Now they've started with their style of menaces again, urging me to accept the following proposal: before the Court they admit that the dismissal was illegal and pay me that money, but in turn© I have to purge all materials on them I put online. They pay that ridicule fine, I clean, they go scot-free, as if nothing happened, as if they did nothing wrong and as if I am doing here even something criminal. If I do not accept this — they're going to carry out their threats.
I said no lies.
What did kinda surprise me — that Spanish Court did not find anything abnormal in their menaces*), neither noticed any contradiction in their proposal with its own decision at the end. The judge had a look rather petulant by me declining their menaces.
And all that looked really quite medieval to me…
- On the Court hearing Luis Serrano, CRG Director, came to witness me «constantly refusing» to talk to his favorite, M Lluch Senar.
That was yet another sheer lie (unless just comical):
I've updated the DropBox with the copies of correspondence which happened a month before my dismissal when I had to explain to M Lluch Senar, biochemist, (© L. Serrano) how mass-spec really works (she tries to show up herself as if she understands it but pretty dumb to get a simple point). Finally, from the 3rd attempt, she gets it and even thanks me, reminding me one more time that I'd be fired anyway. She's been obsessed repeating that in near every second her email with cc to Luis Serrano. I bet that seemed so sexy to her patron.
Chat between me and her is mentioned in the beginning of that correspondence. So the meeting was with me and her alone, at my initiative because in that case that did make sense.
Luis Serrano was well aware of the meeting, he was in cc.
In fact, I refused no meeting with his favorite. I've been just asking for assistance as she used to be damn blind, aggressive and incompetent, sabotaging any communication with the lab people and involved in the project colleagues.
That wasn't the only lie he told to the Court, also he lied about me unrelated to his starring in «I think what maria proposed does not make any sense» — that was in fact said after me trying to explain Maria the same, but not that way directly. I just did not discarded her suggestion completely (that'd be too risky! but minding now Serrano's confession to the Court — see in DropBox Court's decision: his favorite reported on me unsuitable for her right around the same time!)
The related email is now on the DropBox too (my actual boss was in cc of course and Luis Serrano was surely reacting on this correspondence).
- The third lie:
The CRG representative told the Court (and Luis Serrano repeated it) that I was given 3 months to follow discipline I allegedly violated.
In fact, next day after Serrano told me that his favorite M Lluch Senar is my boss (yet another one, as I still had to ask my official boss for holidays and the like), less than 3 months before my dismissal, I've got a letter from her, that she had «talked with Luis and he said me that he has given you the opportunity to work for three months in the lab and to finish the project». That is I was told I'd be fired anyway. Serrano was in cc in that email (it is in DropBox too).
No way he didn't know, I was pointing on that assertion (that I'd be fired anyway) to the HR, Conflict resolution Committee. They didn't care, they served to M Lluch-Senar and her henpecked one like the dogs, despite the law — «it'll be illegal and you can go to the Court then». Well, we'll kill you, what's the matter — your relatives can go to the Court then (the Court won't find anything wrong in that).
Luis Serrano, CRG Director, lied to the Court.
Not to mention the repeated falsehood about Conflict Resolution Committee, implying that they called for it (yet another lie — who could think that my call for it they'd basely use for themselves…), and about the reason of my transfer to Serrano lab, in order to mob and fire actually, as he implicitly confirmed himself: his favorite report on me that she's unhappy to work with me (meanwhile, after her discussion with me and he writes to several colleagues that her proposals make no sense) and he transfers me to his lab coercing me to talk to Sra. Lluch only alone.
Needless to say now that this Spanish Court did not give the floor to me unless defendant party would have asked for it. And of course they were not interested to ask.
— yet another achievement of Spanish science and Social Justice ⚖️ in Spain/Catalunya… But thank Providence and post medieval (post-fascist?) world: otherwise I'd have been put on fire literally, in the Auto-da-fé (or shot dead by these franquists).
*) artículo 169 del Código Penal of Spain: «Amenazas son un delito o una falta… el anuncio de un mal futuro ilícito que es posible… con la finalidad de causar inquietud o miedo…» = «Threats are a crime or a fault ... the announcement of a bad illicit future that is possible ... with the purpose of causing concern or fear ...»