Sacked professor sues university for ‘ageism’ job termination
LONDON: An economics professor has claimed he was the victim of ageism after the University of Melbourne sacked him for “inappropriate behaviour, including sexual misconduct” with a student in her early 20s.
Veteran econometrics academic Vance Martin, 68, is suing the university for about $500,000 in damages, including the lost chance to secure an Order of Australia honour, over what he claims was his unlawful termination following four decades of service.
The university sacked Mr Martin last year after making findings against him for serious misconduct, including multiple allegations of inappropriate behaviour and sexual misconduct towards students stretching back to 2015.
The investigation was sparked by a 23-year-old student who complained about Mr Martin’s alleged behaviour with her in 2021 and 2022.
In his Federal Court application, Mr Martin denied any wrongdoing and argued it was “clear and unambiguous” that the university had taken adverse action against him because of his age and the difference in years between him and his accuser.
He cited the investigator’s report that noted he “is decades older than [the student] – she is approximately 21-23 and he 60-plus” and he “is an experienced, mature, ‘worldly’ individual. [The student] is young not only in biological age, but in terms of experience …”
Members of the university also considered he had “old school” attributes because of his age, he claimed.
Mr Martin is disputing the independence of the university’s investigator, who allegedly told him her approach was “guilty until proven innocent”, did not interview witnesses or some alleged victims and failed to give weight to evidence the student was lying.
He claims the university knew of some of the alleged conduct as far back as early 2017 but never reprimanded him or advised him of it until more than five years later.
While his application and statement of claim did not specify the alleged behaviour, the documents revealed the most recent incident involved Mr Martin lunching with the student over wine at La Spaghettata restaurant and meeting her in parks.
However, Mr Martin said he had proffered “irrefutable evidence” that the student initiated the lunch and also submitted bank records and a statement from the restaurant owner to deny he poured her wine or that she consumed an excessive amount of alcohol.
Meetings with the student at parks was due to a joint decision to “prevent the spread of COVID-19”, according to his statement of claim.
The student’s string of messages to him, including telling him “happy new year to my favourite lecturer” and gifting him a bottle of champagne and Christmas thank you card, also proved she did not find any conduct to be unwelcome, he said.
He claimed his entire correspondence with the student was confined to five areas: her studies; organising two lunches and four meetings; advice for her friend on maths courses; food and recipes; and “talking about pussycats”.
The university’s substantiation of his other allegedly inappropriate behaviour with students was implausible, he argued.
The oldest allegation dated back to a function in 2015 that the university said involved a “young Asian woman, likely a student” but who was “unknown” and unable to be interviewed.
While Mr Martin complained about the independence and process in the first investigation, a second investigation upheld its findings.
Mr Martin, represented by law firm McDonald Murholme, is alleging his sacking was in part because he exercised his right to complain and because of his age.
He is seeking damages including $400,000 for two years of lost income, $60,000 for hurt and humiliation, and more for lost reputation, and “loss of opportunity to secure valuable professional and personal acknowledgment”.
