quote:6. As for prejudice on the basis of beliefs or opinions, I repeatedly and consistently emphasized to staff (and to Dr. von Sternberg personally), verbally or in writing, that private beliefs and/or controversial editorial decisions were irrelevant in the workplace, that we would continue to provide full Research Associate benefits to Dr. von Sternberg, that he was an established and respected scientist, and that he would at all times be treated as such. On behalf of all National Museum of Natural History staff, I would like to assert that we hold the freedoms of religion and belief as dearly as any one. The right to heterodox opinion is particularly important to scientists. Why Dr. von Sternberg chose to represent his interactions with me as he did is mystifying. I can’t speak to his interactions with anyone else.
Re: A response to Sternberg's accusations against the Smithsonian
Sternberg's position and privileges have not been curtailed in any way (according to Coddington). Perhaps his peers are not as chummy as they used to be, but chumminess is not guaranteed by the Constitution or any law of which I'm aware.
OSC has dropped Sternberg's complaint: no jurisdiction
Since Sternberg is not actually an employee of the Smithsonian, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel has concluded it does not have jurisdiction. More discussion on The Panda's Thumb at Sternberg complaint dismissed.
™ Version 4.0 Beta
