Aoibheann Ni Shuilleabhain Harassment Story

Charles Babbage

StevenToast wrote: »

Unfortunately for Aoibheann, being an ex of Tubs will hang around her like a UCD professor for a long time....

Because of people such as those on this forum who go on about Tubridy, who is in no way connected or relevant to this thread.

I think I have been known to post here about Tubridy as a broadcaster, but this discussion of his relationship in this thread is not helpful and says a lot about those who think this the most relevant thing to post about.

My point being these kinds of vultures are everywhere in UCD, and their intentions have nothing to do with protecting professors and ensuring their position is valued, and everything to do with advancing the University as a brand. This story is the logical conclusion of how business is done at UCD.

Ah yes, that would be the "UCD Dublin" brand, thought up no doubt by those responsible for AIB Bank and with management with equal public responsibility.

hamburgham

paw patrol wrote: »

He doesn't have an RTE pension cos he isn't RTE staff - he doesn't actually work for RTE ...he has a pension (assume he has one) from his own company.


his salary however....

Actually he does work for RTE, exclusively as far as I can see and in what other industry would Revenue allow this blatant self employment farce. He cannot provide his service without the RTE infrastructure behind him so how on earth cam he claim to be self employed.

hamburgham

skooterblue2 wrote: »

He will get work again but maybe not in Europe. Or he could working for private industry.

I wouldn't be one bit surprised if he's still on the UCD payroll on sick leave or some type of long term leave arrangement.


Remember David Norris was on paid sick leave from Trinity for years while he was busy pontificating on the airwaves, in the Seanad and anywhere else that would indulge him.

hamburgham

hamburgham wrote: »

I wouldn't be one bit surprised if he's still on the UCD payroll on sick leave or some type of long term leave arrangement.


Remember David Norris was on paid sick leave from Trinity for years while he was busy pontificating on the airwaves, in the Seanad and anywhere else that would indulge him.

In fact, I’d put money on it that he’s still on the payroll on long term leave. Nothing to indicate that UCD grasped the nettle.

An Ri rua

irishblessing wrote: »

People not directly involved/have no experience in something like this often talk a similar big game. However in reality most people are not willing to get involved, think you should sweep it under the carpet, think you're overreacting, think you've "misunderstood" the situation, and worst of all- think it's something women have always gone through and can just keep enduring. They think ruining a man's career or reputation is always a step too far instead of holding him accountable for his own behaviour and consequences.
Beating the guy up wouldn't have made her feel any better about coming into work the following day. May even escalate things. Of course she'd be worried about retaliation. These kinds of comments, no offence, are short sighted.

No offence, but I've more experience of same than you'll ever know. Which won't be detailed here. If you were inadequate in a past situation, as I was in my youth, then I'm sorry for your trauma and shame. I hope you've made amends directly or indirectly since then.
Why would you beat someone when you could look them in the eye and tell them the next steps? A beating, which by the way, you have suggested, my post did not, could be counter-productive and is advocating violence, which Boards would frown on. . Fear and uncertainty are elements of conversation and are within the perception of the recipient. Harassed harasser, stalked stalker. Bullied bully. It's not rocket science at all.

You clearly have little experience with snuffing out issues. The victim is never told anything in these situations. Why would you do that??? And cause them more distress and fear of the future? Unless one's motives are alterior. You clearly have not danced the dance much, my friend and are the one talking the talk.

People act, problem goes away. A few people act, most don't. I'll grant you that. I'm still surprised that no one in her circle could arrive at an understanding with the man. As I say, people have got soft. Come down the country and see how it's done. Or at least been done before, allegedly. Barring orders, proof, etc, all of that is right and proper. But it's good to talk...

Realt Dearg Sec

An Ri rua wrote: »

No offence, but I've more experience of same than you'll ever know. Which won't be detailed here. If you were inadequate in a past situation, as I was in my youth, then I'm sorry for your trauma and shame. I hope you've made amends directly or indirectly since then.
Why would you beat someone when you could look them in the eye and tell them the next steps? A beating, which by the way, you have suggested, my post did not, could be counter-productive and is advocating violence, which Boards would frown on. . Fear and uncertainty are elements of conversation and are within the perception of the recipient. Harassed harasser, stalked stalker. Bullied bully. It's not rocket science at all.

You clearly have little experience with snuffing out issues. The victim is never told anything in these situations. Why would you do that??? And cause them more distress and fear of the future? Unless one's motives are alterior. You clearly have not danced the dance much, my friend and are the one talking the talk.

People act, problem goes away. A few people act, most don't. I'll grant you that. I'm still surprised that no one in her circle could arrive at an understanding with the man. As I say, people have got soft. Come down the country and see how it's done. Or at least been done before, allegedly. Barring orders, proof, etc, all of that is right and proper. But it's good to talk...

That was the creepiest message I've read in a while.

An Ri rua

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

That was the creepiest message I've read in a while.

I grant you that perspective.

When you've seen bullies, victims, barring orders, Gardaí in homes, you develop a clear perspective. Some break, some toughen (but break effectively as they were gentler souls), some see no evil. All get damaged, including the aggressor, the longer sh1t goes on. They get emboldened. Meet fear with fear or have someone else do it.

To any girls or women reading, or anyone who's a victim, don't be scared. Don't be scared of tomorrow, of retaliation, or of harm coming to the person you tell. Don't be scared. So many kids ring Childline and can't get through. But tell people you trust. Tell them early and ask them to observe. Don't tell a hothead, as hotheads are full of fear. Hotheads rough a person up, if at all. This effect is temporary. Instead, tell someone who is always carrying out their word. Someone who says less. They will guide you out of harm and hopefully maybe the aggressor too. Non-violence is more scary than violence. Unless you're dealing with hardened criminals.
I feel very sorry for this man's family, if he has any, and relations tonight.
Hard conversations, harder than a Garda can have (though I've seen them have frank words to very good effect) early in the day might have quietened this man. For the good of all. It's just a terrible pity for all concerned, including UCD. But it would appear that the organisation's corporate governance has a lot of questions to answer. It appears that they may cause her as much heartache over the next 2 years as this cretin did previously.

Wishing her peace and security.

Ps I recall reading, when I was awarded my first degree, that should you bring the college into disrepute by your public actions, your academic award could technically be rescinded. Wouldn't it be fantastic if such lofty notions were applied to the teaching faculty also? Would seem basic gross misconduct activity in this day and age.

ILoveYourVibes

hamburgham wrote: »

Remember David Norris was on paid sick leave from Trinity for years while he was busy pontificating on the airwaves, in the Seanad and anywhere else that would indulge him.

He had cancer for many years.

Kaybaykwah

Man Vs ManUre wrote: »

Why didn’t Tubridy give your’ man a good beating??

Actually, why wouldn't any man in her entourage just confront the guy?

Why didn't one of UCD higher ups not just
go talk to the futzer and tell him to buzz off after the first alarming situations? There are plenty of children told off for bullying, but when it comes to adults, it's another story...

hamburgham

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

He had cancer for many years.

This predated the cancer. I think the cancer was relatively recently, after his presidential bid. The paid sick leave from Trinity predated this.

tobefrank321

hamburgham wrote: »

This predated the cancer. I think the cancer was relatively recently, after his presidential bid. The paid sick leave from Trinity predated this.

From memory, I believe he picked up some illness when travelling abroad that left him severely fatigued most of the time. Strange that he was able to attend the Seanad though during that time. Indicates he wasn't too fatigued or else the Seanad is a bit of a doss.

tobefrank321

Kaybaykwah wrote: »

Actually, why wouldn't any man in her entourage just confront the guy?

Why didn't one of UCD higher ups not just
go talk to the futzer and tell him to buzz off after the first alarming situations? There are plenty of children told off for bullying, but when it comes to adults, it's another story...

Very tricky situation.
If a male friend confronted him, it might make the situation even worse. She'd be accused of encouraging something or other, or he'd make a complaint.
I'd say she hoped to keep the thing quiet, hope he'd go away by himself and HR would do something about it.

Standman

Kaybaykwah wrote: »

Actually, why wouldn't any man in her entourage just confront the guy?

Why didn't one of UCD higher ups not just
go talk to the futzer and tell him to buzz off after the first alarming situations? There are plenty of children told off for bullying, but when it comes to adults, it's another story...

He was escorted out of a hotel twice by the guards, safe to say he doesn't care/was incapable of listening to reason.

BattleCorp

There is no way that the HR department should have let things get as bad as they did.

Here's how it should normally be handled.

1. Aoibheann complains to HR.
2. Someone from HR has a word with yer man about the complaint and warns him to stay away or else he'll be in trouble.
3. Yer man keeps up contact.
4. HR initiate formal proceedings against yer man.
5. Yer man keeps up contact.
6. UCD kick yer man to the kerb.

I think that''s a fair process that might even be cut short at step 4.

But as was mentioned already, he didn't pay any attention to the Gardai dragging him out of the hotel so he probably wouldn't have paid much attention to HR warnings etc.

IAMAMORON

Does anyone think she elected to involve the media for fear of any backlash from within UCD? I get the feeling she went so public about the matter to highlight the issue but to also ensure she has a positive future within UCD?

Could she have had other motivations for involving the press?

Before you jump down my throat here, I think it is fair to point out. There are a lot of women who have gone through hell and back with their harassment stories and not involved the media. So I think it is a relevant point? Why did she chose to go actively public with the matter? Is it a journalist "scoop" or was she hoping to reinforce herself against any negativity within UCD down the line?

irishblessing

An Ri rua wrote: »

No offence, but I've more experience of same than you'll ever know. Which won't be detailed here. If you were inadequate in a past situation, as I was in my youth, then I'm sorry for your trauma and shame. I hope you've made amends directly or indirectly since then.
Why would you beat someone when you could look them in the eye and tell them the next steps? A beating, which by the way, you have suggested, my post did not, could be counter-productive and is advocating violence, which Boards would frown on. . Fear and uncertainty are elements of conversation and are within the perception of the recipient. Harassed harasser, stalked stalker. Bullied bully. It's not rocket science at all.

You clearly have little experience with snuffing out issues. The victim is never told anything in these situations. Why would you do that??? And cause them more distress and fear of the future? Unless one's motives are alterior. You clearly have not danced the dance much, my friend and are the one talking the talk.

People act, problem goes away. A few people act, most don't. I'll grant you that. I'm still surprised that no one in her circle could arrive at an understanding with the man. As I say, people have got soft. Come down the country and see how it's done. Or at least been done before, allegedly. Barring orders, proof, etc, all of that is right and proper. But it's good to talk...

What the F....?! You've somehow completely read that the wrong way around, absolutely baffling. I literally said the opposite to what you're jumping down my throat about. Reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
And you've overstepped yourself with your assumptions so far you've just fallen over the cliff. May I remind you that you've no clue who you're talking to. I've taken a harassment/assault claim successfully through the courts so take a f-g seat. Thanks.

KaneToad

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Does anyone think she elected to involve the media for fear of any backlash from within UCD? I get the feeling she went so public about the matter to highlight the issue but to also ensure she has a positive future within UCD?

Could she have had other motivations for involving the press?

Before you jump down my throat here, I think it is fair to point out. There are a lot of women who have gone through hell and back with their harassment stories and not involved the media. So I think it is a relevant point? Why did she chose to go actively public with the matter? Is it a journalist "scoop" or was she hoping to reinforce herself against any negativity within UCD down the line?

Another woman going to the media wouldn't have got the same coverage. Dr. Ní Shúilleabháin's public profile has made this more newsworthy for media outlets, unfortunately.

I doubt she is under any threat from UCD.

Harrassment is more common than you might think - it should be publicised more. I had similar in a workplace. Persistent romantic propositions, from an individual in authority, that I had to repeatedly rebuff. 'Wouldn't take no for an answer' type stuff.

irishblessing

An Ri rua wrote: »

No offence, but I've more experience of same than you'll ever know. Which won't be detailed here. If you were inadequate in a past situation, as I was in my youth, then I'm sorry for your trauma and shame. I hope you've made amends directly or indirectly since then.
Why would you beat someone when you could look them in the eye and tell them the next steps? A beating, which by the way, you have suggested, my post did not, could be counter-productive and is advocating violence, which Boards would frown on. . Fear and uncertainty are elements of conversation and are within the perception of the recipient. Harassed harasser, stalked stalker. Bullied bully. It's not rocket science at all.

You clearly have little experience with snuffing out issues. The victim is never told anything in these situations. Why would you do that??? And cause them more distress and fear of the future? Unless one's motives are alterior. You clearly have not danced the dance much, my friend and are the one talking the talk.

People act, problem goes away. A few people act, most don't. I'll grant you that. I'm still surprised that no one in her circle could arrive at an understanding with the man. As I say, people have got soft. Come down the country and see how it's done. Or at least been done before, allegedly. Barring orders, proof, etc, all of that is right and proper. But it's good to talk...

Actually, you owe me a huge apology. I literally said threatening a beating on harassers is NOT the answer. And you respond to me like that? It's actually insane how wrongly you took that up. Telling me to make amends directly or indirectly for what exactly? I looked my harasser straight in the f-g eyes in court and held my own. I set an example to him and my children. F YOU actually.

ThewhiteJesus

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Does anyone think she elected to involve the media for fear of any backlash from within UCD? I get the feeling she went so public about the matter to highlight the issue but to also ensure she has a positive future within UCD?

Could she have had other motivations for involving the press?

Before you jump down my throat here, I think it is fair to point out. There are a lot of women who have gone through hell and back with their harassment stories and not involved the media. So I think it is a relevant point? Why did she chose to go actively public with the matter? Is it a journalist "scoop" or was she hoping to reinforce herself against any negativity within UCD down the line?

100% agree with you but i got called all sorts of names for having the same opinion so good luck !

IAMAMORON

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

100% agree with you but i got called all sorts of names for having the same opinion so good luck !

You need a thick neck to throw stones around glasshouses.

But I will be honest and think that there is certain amount of a "media lead" going on here.

No fluke it is in the weekend edition of our leading broadsheet either.

If someone accuses you of being cynical around harassment issues it is because they prefer the drama to discussing the problem, IMO. A lot of drama types like chastising opinion. Which is worse?

If you question victims' prerogative about going public on their plight you open yourself up to the accusation of not having empathy or even worse being an advocate for harassment. You can very quickly become the pound of flesh some off the more militant posters will want to corner and throw mud at.

Yurt2

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

100% agree with you but i got called all sorts of names for having the same opinion so good luck !

No. You said she did it for publicity, which is a sh*tty read of a psychologically stressful and potentially dangerous situation for a young woman.

So you can stop feeling sorry for yourself.

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt! wrote: »

No. You said she did it for publicity, which is a sh*tty read of a psychologically stressful and potentially dangerous situation for a young woman.

So you can stop feeling sorry for yourself.

I never used those words, are you ok love ?

Yurt2

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

I never used those words, are you ok love ?

You said she did it to "promote her name". Direct quote.

You got filleted and now you're on a sulk.

walshb

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

100% agree with you but i got called all sorts of names for having the same opinion so good luck !

Sorry, but you went down the road of her being an attention seeker and looking for column inches..

That was not why she did that. She is NOT that type person at all..

walshb

walshb wrote: »

Sorry, but you went down the road of her being an attention seeker and looking for column inches..

That was not why she did that. She is NOT that type person at all..

To be fair, I did not think the accused was "that type of person" either, even though I somewhat knew the guy personally.

So I don't think you can outright claim that she is "not that type of person" when you don't know her personally at all.

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt! wrote: »

You said she did it to "promote her name". Direct quote.

You got filleted and now you're on a sulk.

Ok so two things, one that is not what you said so you lied, they were not my words, ouch.
Second show me that direct quote love ?

ThewhiteJesus

walshb wrote: »

Sorry, but you went down the road of her being an attention seeker and looking for column inches..

That was not why she did that. She is NOT that type person at all..

Again not words I used

LiquidZeb

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Very tricky situation.
If a male friend confronted him, it might make the situation even worse. She'd be accused of encouraging something or other, or he'd make a complaint.
I'd say she hoped to keep the thing quiet, hope he'd go away by himself and HR would do something about it.

I don't understand this whole male fantasy that pummeling the **** out of the creep suddenly magics everything okay again. Oftentimes the mindset around it seems to be avenging his damaged goods than any concern or regard for the woman at the centre of it.

Yurt2

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Ok so two things, one that is not what you said so you lied, they were not my words, ouch.
Second show me that direct quote love ?

Page 3 of this thread. Suck it up. Drop the "love" as well, as if your posts aren't dripping in weirdness enough.

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt! wrote: »

Page 3 of this thread. Suck it up. Drop the "love" as well, as if your posts aren't dripping in weirdness enough.

Why didn’t you quote love ?? I wonder