Research misconduct and breach of ethics

How Luis Serrano, CRG's (Barcelona) Director, lied to the Catalan/Spanish Court

Below is how His Excellency Luis Serrano, CRG Director (Spanish/Catalan research institute of Excellence™), did his best to protect reputat...

Showing posts with label job-in-academia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label job-in-academia. Show all posts

Thursday, January 04, 2018

Style of doing science: FAQ on CRG, Barcelona and EMBL-EBI connection


After having known/read my experience in working for science (not real one, but so to say, science), my friends and colleagues keep asking me mainly these two questions: 
I. What happened at EMBL-EBI and why are these cases connected?
— Serrano lab used to be a part of EMBL System Biology Unit, apparently they foster phenotypes like that.
II. Why didn't you quit on your own once you realized that the environment in CRG, Barcelona, was so toxic?
— I did want to, my mistake was that I relied too much on a snitch, was mislead by a «good cop» (Luis Serrano's left hand, whereas his work-wife was a «bad cop») — they all were just a perfect match for each other.
I just could not believe I saw it all real and not in my sleep.
I could not accept the idea that the guy was just a cad.
Also, there was a tiny subjective reason… which kinda shadowed my objective assessment of the situation.
Here are the answers elaborated.
  1. In April of 2013 my boss at EBI-EMBL reported on me to HR after I had used capital letters in one word of the working correspondence: that was the exclamation-like «WHAT?», — he said then that I was rude and impossible to collaborate with (indeed I wasn’t much collaborative in some sense, see below p.13).
    HR explains me that writing one word in email using capital letters is equal to shouting. But on the other hand she looks confused and keeps asking me whether I have something more to tell her. I don’t want to tell more.
    However, the project coordinator, who was the addressee of that my email, says in the presence of HR that she hasn't considered me rude and inconvenient to collaborate.
    Meanwhile I'm excluded from acknowledgement in inner EBI meetings concerning the project: up to the extent that they later say «all right, they took your results and presented them as their own, but they’ve had you acknowledged as they thanked Systems Microscopy consortium and you are a member of it» (nice, isn’t it?).

  2. In June of 2013 all of the sudden my Dad falls down in a swoon and cannot walk well after getting back, I urgently come back home from the UK. My bosses are apprised.

  3. On 25/06/13 my Dad passes away on my arms in a hospital after having tremendously suffered from the acute AAA rupture.
    =
  4. Staying home on my vacations (they were approved) that summer and busy with documentations following the funeral I’m getting a quite boorish email from the project coordinator at EBI that I have to correct something in the code ASAP as she's preparing a paper (in fact the project wasn't ready then for the paper yet and that paper was later written by myself with the help of my boss of the later time).
    Also she writes me that my talk on the ISMB conference was prepared badly — it was very soon after the funeral, though she lied, almost the same talk was also given for the SM consortium spring meeting, later I could bring several references from both conferences proving her falsehood.
    She doesn't forget to note that she understands that I'm in a hard life situation.

  5. I tell her to fuck off: not that words directly, of course, just that she's misbehaving and I won't read her emails until I’ll come back to work from my legit vacations.

  6. When I come back I'm told that my contract is suspended for insubordination and unauthorized leave. The custom was that folks at EBI, including bosses, didn’t care much of vacation paperwork, spoken agreement was usually enough. I’m advised to leave the campus ASAP.

  7. Being in the state of a catatonic stupor I do nothing for about a week, but a colleague meets me and brings EMBL-EBI’s docs and proves me that their actions against me were in contradictions with their own legislative papers. He urges me «Catherine, don’t stay like that, do something, go to a lawyer».

  8. I go to the Cambridge Citizen Advice Bureau, they ask me questions like «Did you hack them? Did you steal something from them? Who is this employer?» and advise me to write and to call to the EMBL-EBI Head Office in Heidelberg, they also give me a list of lawyer addresses to visit.
    I follow their advice.

  9. Next day after my contact with EMBL-EBI HO the Head of Administration at EBI calls me, apologizes for the suspension of the contract and invites me back to work.

  10. All my email/servers etc credentials are withdrawn, I spend some time to get some of that back, but not everything. I’m implicitly hinted that they are prepared to give me an EOC agreement (End of Contract).
    I write to EMBL-EBI Head Office again.

  11. Administrative Director of EMBL, Keith Williamson at that time, comes to the UK to talk to me. It turns out that he’s mislead about the project which they declare as accomplished (it was just a stupid lie, I wonder how further they’d report about it).
    After my talk with him I’m fully restored in my rights.
    They recognize that everything is fine with my holidays, I was wrongly accused in insubordination and unauthorized leave, though no apologies now, except spoken ones from Keith (he was the one who at least seemed a gentleman in all that story).

  12. I’m invited for a chat in the EBI Director office (Ewan Birney) along with my boss and his proxy on R&D tasks. I’m told that I have «questionable personal qualities» (btw, ad hominem is the most beloved fallacy and trick of rogue scientists — Birney repeats the same after my boss) and this is me, who had a lesson now and must comply with their way of doing R&D.

  13. I write another email to the EMBL Head Office with cc to my boss and Birney where I ask (at last) why is that me who has «questionable personal qualities», why was I bullied, why did all this happen after my boss didn’t have me responsive to his invitation to private bike rides (and to have a look together on concert posters, — but I don't mention that), I claim for fair employment practice — that was completely ignored, I also ask to change the person who authorizes my leaves — that was accepted after the investigation, see below.

  14. I get a response from Director General of EMBL, Iain Mattaj, where he implies that the bullying was alleged but that I dared to accuse my boss in sexual harassment and that all needs to be investigated.

  15. I reply that I didn’t say that the conduct of my boss was a sexual harassment per se, all I asked: the explanations of the bullying and I mentioned him hitting on me in that context.
    This my reply was ignored.

  16. I’ve never got any explanation. I was told off that I brought forward the accusation of sexual harassment with no reason. I was made guilty for the mention of the fact that my boss had hit on me and then bullied me.

  17. However, Iain Mattaj apologized for the bullying itself, he even used a word «harassment» in his apologies. After the investigation I’ve got the apology letter from him where he enlightens me that I took the suspension of my contract, accusation in unauthorized leave and removal of all my credentials at work etc for the bullying because my father passed away right before that.
    All the rest was just fine.
    Basically, he didn't apologize for the damage itself, he apologized that I felt damaged.
    Yet better that way, than nothing.
    He also generously spared me from a discipline sentence for my alleged accusation in sexual harassment™ of my boss.
    Nice, isn’t it?
    Although they’ve swapped my boss for his proxy and that was the second gentleman in all that story (minding top level).

  18. After getting that hysterical email from Maria Lluch-Senar — Luis Serrano tandem at CRG 
    (I was surprised, really: Luis himself never was that verbose with English that poor, didn't used ES layout, although this didn't matter: NB — they used ad hominem again, but that was just only Maria's personal way to communicate her problems: 
    «if I do not want to take even an effort to get into your app's functionality — this is your problem, that I have difficulties understanding you» in reply on my rebuttal to her manipulations and lies…)
     
    — I asked Luis Serrano to behave fairly and that I wouldn’t be just silent and shocked, I’d been prepared by this case at EMBL («you are guilty if I'm rude with you and even if I breach our own protocols and rules» — their MO). 
    Maria used to imitate work activity while getting disrespectful and aggressive without any attempt to follow the elementary guidance, like — how to load heavy data (she couldn't use even corporate FTP properly instead of corporate emails, when it was absolutely necessary due to the type of data being transferred… and every time you were guilty with any her problems below any professional qualification!)  
    Although, Serrano lab used to be a part of System Biology unit of EMBL, they had to follow their rules:
    «maintaining a culture based on the principles of good scientific practice, throughout the Laboratory and in their respective Units».

    I believed that they had to follow that at least to the degree that EMBL was able to (appologizing a bit afterwords as «ah, we'are sorry you've feeled that way» — not for the damage itself, of course).
    But Luis Serrano, once the Head of EMBL systems biology Unit and CRG Director, president of SOMMa (some local Spanish Network of Excellence™) said me that he didn't care. Literally:
    «I don't care, we are at CRG here, we have nothing to do with EMBL».
    All right.
    Those were their good scientific practice.

  19. Shortly after this email exchange (where I was trying to get free from the creepy situation) and direct threats to be fired (but with «a lot of money» — yet another dishonesty from the CRG's Director) I apprised Luis Serrano that under the conditions he put on me I’d better quit on my own at the end of the year. Naturally!

    They ignored that, apparently that was not a way to bring them satisfaction (however they did try to fire me first as if following my wish: they prepared papers for that by the end of October to fire me in a couple of weeks after that, see below their lies about 3-months term to make me obeying to the Director's favorite).

  20. But then, in the end of September'2016, they were just about to go to their lab retreat, Serrano wrote me that my presence there would be «awkward» and it’s up to me to go or not, I did not want to go to their retreat, I was preparing to quit anyway.
    But a colleague asked me to come, she also assured me in her support (instead, she started to coercing me to hypocrisy and simulations, allegedly she was suffering from Maria domination and manipulations but turned out to be just a snitch for Serrano).
    Better I’d never seen that part of their specific culture at that retreat (so freaking lowbrow level even ignoring complains of other guests of the resort).
    That was awkward.
    Indeed, shortly before the retreat Luis Serrano accused me that I can work with no one, whereas I had no communications and collaborations with his people by that time — his Maria just cut communications with Serrano lab's folks by any means.
    No one in my lab confirmed the falsehood of me unable to collaborate: I was working in another lab and Serrano—Lluch-Senar were about to move me to their lab, allegedly for better collaboration.
    In fact I was alienated from any collaboration in Serrano lab: instead Serrano had been forcing me to talk to his favorite only alone.
    Later Luis Serrano lied to the Court that they had transferred me to make me follow the discipline I have allegedly violated.

    If they feel better on the way they have chosen: lying, threatening, making their research labs the places of so toxic ambiance with no respect, no open discussion, licking asses, making folks lick asses, humiliating them, snitching on each other, where even their own written code of good scientific practice is violated,
    it's up to them.

    Below
    are the other parts of the story.

Monday, March 27, 2017

Excellence™ by Luis Serrano & Maria Lluch-Senar: plain summary of what happened in CRG, Barcelona.

Firing for disobedience from CRG in Barcelona, scientific institution of Excellence: how scientists demand obedience and recognition of their scientific authority, some very certain scientific authority: after having claimed to recognize the scientific authority of his favorite, his Excellency Director of CRG Luis Serrano, got refusal (in particular, because his favorite used to concoct data before processing).
But the resistance to filthy data manipulation was oppressed — inconvenient for them rebel computer scientist was fired.

Here are some notes of a computer scientist's experience (Mar'2016 — Dec'2016) who was very near to get a TBI*) while working with M Lluch-Senar, CRG's staff scientist.

The latter woman-in-science™ has been advancing her scientific career servicing to Luis Serrano, CRG Director, for his private needs, which, however extraneous or ugly it may look like, hands down should not be whoever else's business unless well-being of another persons and research integrity were drastically affected and put in a shambles.

In previous posts you can see mainly inside description (with the copies of emails and other documents) of the working and firing process performed within the walls of «an international biomedical research institute of excellence» — i.e. CRG, EMBL outstation in Barcelona: the torture of mobbing and lies with yet hardly believable outcome (how it was staged) lasted for several months.
(Court hearing was scheduled in a year, for the end of Jan, 2018 as this was in Spain, so very apt country for misconduct being unabated).

The only excuse for so direct summary of what happened is that the nature of Maria Lluch-Senar's job at CRG and peculiar success is of no secret within those walls, also due to quite open demonstration of this woman in science™ deep connection, way far being really intellectual, with her patron, accompanied by «the closest person, his right hand, she can get fired anyone» (indeed! not to mention full access to CRG director's desktop…), so forth interesting confessions and blatant research misconduct with lies and spreadsheets manipulation.


Research misconduct is not uncommon in Spain

On May'2017 I've got no surprise from these threats of legal persecution from CRG, Barcelona (very consistent with their cultural peculiarities).
It's worth to mention, that all this shame is silently supported and even sponsored with millions of € grants both by EMBL (European Molecular Biology Laboratory) and ERC (European Research Council)

Story archive in Dropbox

*) Traumatic Brain Injury

Friday, January 13, 2017

Luis Serrano, CRG, forces to talk alone with Maria Lluch Senar and…
a certain «indicator, a precursor and a result of» corruption

(yes, that was spooky!)
…whereas what Maria Lluch proposes «does not make any sense» © Luis Serrano, CRG director
(and that was very true)
This is all about scientific institution. This is where your tax money goes to…
How much money, for instance? — see here (H2020) in general,
more exactly: €2,454,522: ERC-2014-ADG grant [1]
So the DB for Mycoplasma project should have been funded from this money…

First, ask yourself: what would you do if a blatant liar aggressively required from you recognition of her scientific authority (whereas it's way far to be even necessary)?
And what if she were fully supported by her patron?
CRG is «an international biomedical research institute of excellence»
CRG mission, vision and values:
«Integrity, ethics and social responsibility»
Mission of CRG (Centre for Genomic Regulation in Barcelona)
Oops! Really?? Dictation to process concocted data, coercion to talk only alone (that was felt very awkward) with someone allegedly responsible, but utterly incompetent, work without necessary collaboration, repeated threats, bullying, slandering, repeated lies, and dismissal at the end — was this all included in that «integrity», «ethics» and «social responsibility»?

«Now I did a job. I ain't got nothing but trouble since I did it... not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character. So let me make this abundantly clear» © Firefly

Luis Serrano Pubul: «I think what maria proposed does not make any sense»
A few months later the very same person fired the main addressee of this letter for refusal to recognize the same maria's scientific authority... — interesting, isn't it?

On 06/07/16 18:39, Luis Serrano Pubul wrote:

> Dear Katerina
> Could we meet next week [...]?
> I think what maria proposed to connect directly to the MS raw data or sequencing data does not make any sense.
 
All right. Very true. But wait, what?
Luis Serrano Pubul: «You need to leave the lab if you do not talk with her alone»:

On 15/11/16 10:26, Luis Serrano Pubul wrote:

> Katerina I can try to be there, but remember what we discussed if you cannot work with Maria and you cannot talk with her alone you need to leave the lab end of December. She is your boss for the project.
> Thanks
> Luis
>
> From: Katerina Kirsanоva
> Sent: martes, 15 de noviembre de 2016 10:21 a.m.
> Cc: Luis Serrano Pubul
> Subject: Re:
>
> Dear Luis,
> I wouldn't like to discuss it with Maria tete-a-tete, please.
> I just need the doc file with specification on the formats.
>
> Cheers, -
> Catherine
> El 11/15/16 a las 07:45, Maria Lluch Senar escribió:
>> Hi Katerina
>> We can talk about MS files at 16,30. Is it ok for you?

Of course they perfectly knew that Katerina could talk alone with Maria.
But when you're threatened and coerced to talk alone with someone no matter what is going on and no matter whether your job requires work collaboration — this feels flat out wrong, at very least it makes you just sick. Moreover, if you're already absolutely certain: you cannot give them what they are eager to get from you — and that is not your job and professional skills.

K. was doomed anyway, Luis was playing here as by the time of this his email, several weeks before it, M Lluch-Senar already wrote K. that K. would be fired anyway:

On 28/09/16 14:23, Maria Lluch Senar wrote:
> I have 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.
[NB: K. had 5 years contract signed by Luis Serrano on behalf of CRG, it turned out to be just a sheet of paper. No respect to a person whatsoever, neither to their own legislation]

Maria wrote that (with cc to CRG Director, i.e. Luis Serrano Pubul) the very next day after K. was told that Maria was her boss since then and on: the day before this email, on 27/09/16, Luis told K. in his office that for K. to save her job he gave her 3 months to get along 1) with Maria and 2) with the people in the lab — as at the same time K. was falsely accused that she can work with no one (NB: Katerina had been just moved to the Serrano lab), — i.e.:
if K. gets along with no one then K. is fired.

In reality both these two so nice «warrants» were put away almost immediately.
«There's no honor among thieves» (even «end of December» was a lie… — turned out be the middle of December)
K. had no problems whatsoever with the folks in the labs, that was too obvious, but certainly did not matter: apparently Maria was already promised that after 3 months «the toy» would be discarded.

Luis Serrano's wife, Isabelle Vernos, corruption, CRG, Barcelona, ERC: European Research Counsil, Conflict of interest
From Library of the European Parliament, «Conflicts of interest in public administration», 05/02/2013: Isn't it piquant:
Chair of Women In Science/Gender Balance Committee at CRG,
Isabelle Vernos is at the same time…
— Director's (Luis Serrano's) wife & member of the ERC Scientific Council!

Hence the party looks even more languishing: there is a certain «an indicator, a precursor and a result of» corruption.

CRG Director's wife, his miss-stress or other closed to him more than others women-in-science — all of them surely have gotten the unquestionable scientific awards and perks: panels, committees, conference trips, etc — you know how creatively and productively modern scientists spend public money, — having such kind of pull is apparently normal for Spain or Spanish science. But for an outside observer the question remains: what exactly those Women In Science™ were awarded for?
Otherwise, unless it's a corruption. What is that?
Franco style (á la féminin) of management and profiting from science?
Hard to bring up other allusions…

All right, in reality Franco was adhered to the family values otherwise, more traditional way.
This case was an advanced modern version of Spanish neo-franquist modus operandi. Kinda harem way (or alfonsish way.. depending on the perspective.. lol) , surely with the greatest respect to the wives, so worth women with their financial or otherwise depending servants at their also very traditional service. But traditional otherwise. Epitome of women in science and men at women, in their ways to serve. For science, of course. You'd rather dream to join them!


More picante details on the family bounds (see the thread)…