Students in the science department were called to a meeting yesterday afternoon to discuss Sperry\u2019s departure and address security issues.<\/p>\n
A student spoken to by the Herald said the meeting covered the fact Sperry would not be returning from his leave, but did not go into specifics about the circumstances of his departure.<\/p>\n
However, the student said university staff confirmed they were in the process of having Sperry trespassed from campus and it would be \u201cimminent\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey gave information about support and then there was a presentation around security.\u201d <\/p>\n
The student said they were given general security information. <\/p>\n
A slide presentation shown to students, and obtained by the Herald, was titled \u201cRisk and Safety Advice\u201d. <\/p>\n
One of the slides read: \u201cA former staff member is impacting on the safety, and\/or feelings of safety of our people.\u201d<\/p>\n
It gave general advice and tips on what to do if students felt unsafe. <\/p>\n
\u201cSafety reminder: if you ever feel unsafe on or off campus, call 111 immediately.\u201d <\/p>\n
The student said there were many questions during the briefing, \u201cabout what to do if he\u2019s seen off campus, on campus, those sorts of questions\u201d.<\/p>\n
People were relieved to have a resolution but had not expected a security talk, the student said.<\/p>\n
They alleged concerns about Sperry potentially tailgating his way into the building were highlighted during the briefing.<\/p>\n
Another student confirmed they were also told in the meeting the university was preparing a trespass order against Sperry and that students raised concerns about potential tailgating.<\/p>\n
A university spokesperson told the Herald it has \u201ca duty of care for the safety of staff and students\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn response to concerns raised by students, the University held a standard safety briefing on Tuesday in the Science Faculty.\u201d<\/p>\n
The meetings for current and former students, as well as supervisors, came after head of school Duncan McGillivray announced Sperry\u2019s departure over email. <\/p>\n
The meetings were \u201cto discuss the practical implications for them and answer any questions related to this. More information will be sent directly to this group about that meeting\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u2018Offensive, humiliating or intimidating\u2019<\/p>\n
Sperry specialises in organic synthesis medicinal chemistry and green chemistry. He has been a faculty member since at least 2012.<\/p>\n
His profile has now been deleted from the university website.<\/p>\n
According to the investigation report, one university complainant alleged in 2018 she felt pressured by Sperry to run a reaction at a larger scale than she considered safe.<\/p>\n
She claimed a fire then occurred, which she regarded as \u201calmost fatal\u201d.<\/p>\n
Another student allegedly put out the fire, and she claimed Sperry said later that had that student not been there, she would be \u201cin a morgue\u201d and he would be \u201cin jail\u201d.<\/p>\n
Sperry agreed a small fire occurred but disputed the characterisation that it was \u201cnear fatal\u201d and denied making the \u201cmorgue\/jail\u201d comment or pressuring her to conduct unsafe work.<\/p>\n
After weighing this and other lab safety complaints, investigators found that while Sperry took significant steps to promote lab safety, he showed patterns of inconsistent implementation and inadequate oversight, leading to several avoidable or poorly managed incidents.<\/p>\n
Investigators also found Sperry handled reported hazards or related student concerns in an unduly casual or dismissive manner on three occasions. <\/p>\n
An allegation relating to bullying or harassment was also upheld.<\/p>\n
One complainant told investigators the environment created by Sperry\u2019s \u201cconfrontational and undermining\u201d interactions left students feeling insecure.<\/p>\n
A University of Auckland investigation found that science professor Jon Sperry had displayed a \u201cpattern of concerning behaviour\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen [students] struggled to answer a question or remained silent because they were too intimidated to speak, Jon would mutter phrases such as \u2018For f***\u2019s sake\u2019, \u2018Jesus Christ\u2019,\u201d he allegedly said.<\/p>\n
The report acknowledged Sperry\u2019s responses to the harassment and bullying complaints, which included concerns he raised about the breakdown of a personal relationship he shared with a staffer and his supervisory relationship with another.<\/p>\n
\u201cEven allowing for these factors, we detect a pattern in Professor Sperry\u2019s responses of attempting to undermine the integrity or to question the motivation of all witnesses with whom we interacted,\u201d the report said.<\/p>\n
On balance, investigators found consistent accounts of his behaviour in group or one-on-one meetings from a wide range of witnesses.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt was offensive, humiliating or intimidating to at least some individuals within the group.\u201d<\/p>\n
Investigators acknowledged the witnesses knew each other, but did not believe the allegations were deliberately orchestrated by collusion in an attempt to deceive, as Sperry had alleged.<\/p>\n
Investigators found the upheld allegations demonstrated a \u201cpattern of concerning behaviour\u201d that needed to be addressed.<\/p>\n
Some allegations were removed from the investigation\u2019s scope. These included message exchanges between Sperry and one of the complainants, concerns about his professional boundaries and his alleged behaviour at Christmas parties.<\/p>\n
Sperry declined to comment yesterday and the university said it did not comment on \u201cemployment matters\u201d.<\/p>\n