An academic has won an employment tribunal case for unfair dismissal after he lost his job under a mandatory PhD policy brought in by a university.

Jonathan Duxbury, a former senior lecturer in accountancy at University of Huddersfield, was told in 2013 that he would need a doctorate to continue teaching at his level.

It followed the introduction of a policy?at Huddersfield the same year?insisting that all full-time permanent lecturers should have a PhD or study to obtain one.??

According to a statement released on behalf of Mr Duxbury¡¯s lawyers after the ruling, he enrolled for a PhD in 2014 but told the university that the increased workload would be unmanageable and would impact his mental health.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

However, Mr Duxbury ¨C who does have professional accountancy qualifications ¨C was told he still needed to continue with his doctorate, something ¡°which exacerbated Mr?Duxbury¡¯s mental health condition¡±, according to the statement.

After a number of disciplinary meetings, the lecturer was sacked, the statement says, leading to him taking his case to an employment tribunal with the backing of the University and College Union (UCU).

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

A ruling at Leeds Employment Tribunal has now found that he was unfairly dismissed.

Mr Duxbury, 57, said that in his view, forcing him to study for a PhD ¡°made no sense¡±.

¡°The students had always been happy with my teaching and I saw no benefit for anyone in me taking on such an onerous course, especially when ¨C as I am in my 50s ¨C it was going to have little standing on my future career prospects,¡± he said.

Iain Birrell, a trade union law specialist at Thompsons Solicitors, which represented the lecturer, said the issue ¡°could have been resolved with a reasonable concession¡± from Huddersfield when he first raised concerns but the case ¡°ended up becoming a battle of attrition that benefitted no one¡±.

¡°The judge in the hearing said herself that Mr Duxbury had acted with integrity, while the university had been ¡®wholly unreasonable¡¯ with a ¡®closed mind¡¯ to Mr Duxbury¡¯s reasonable expectation that his health would be considered and measures put in place to protect it,¡± he said.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°In addition, the judge agreed that the university¡¯s claims that the PhD course wouldn¡¯t invade his personal time were at complete odds with the reality faced by Mr Duxbury and many of his colleagues.¡±

Data from the Higher Education Statistics Agency shows that around 80 per cent of full-time academic staff at Huddersfield had a PhD in 2019-20, a proportion that has?climbed rapidly since the policy was introduced.

A spokeswoman for the university said the outcome of the tribunal ¡°relates to the circumstances of one member of staff¡±.?

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°The tribunal judgment made reference to the university being entitled to introduce policies that?develop?the?staff and student experience and the introduction of the doctoral study requirement was considered reasonable,¡± she said.

Mr Duxbury, who stands to receive a settlement to be decided at a later date, said he had managed to get a job lecturing part time at another university.

¡°I feel my confidence is starting to improve again. But for years, I was subject to a number of demoralising disciplinary procedures that stemmed solely from me raising what was a legitimate issue.¡±

UCU regional official Julie Kelley said it had been ¡°shameful¡± that the case had dragged on for many years?instead of Huddersfield ¡°meaningfully engaging with concerns raised back in 2014¡±.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°Let this be a shot across the bows for any employer thinking about acting in a similar manner,¡± she added.

simon.baker@timeshighereducation.com