I write to you as a concerned member of the CUNY community. Alas, circumstances require me to remain anonymous. But I assure you that I have extensive personal knowledge of Professor Johnson’s case. It has been alarming to see the inaccurate, incomplete, and exceedingly negative reports that have appeared in the press and on the Internet about this matter. I am confident that you would want to know all the facts of this case.
When Professor Johnson arrived at Brooklyn College in September 1999, there was reason to view his appointment with excitement. However, because of Professor Johnson’s egregiously poor behavior, that excitement has turned into extreme disappointment. Equally disappointing and, frankly, embarrassing are CUNY’s efforts to prevent the college from ridding itself of such a poor employee. It is shameful in the extreme that this great university cowers at the actions of a man who has done so much damage to one of its colleges.
Professor Johnson’s actions have created and perpetuated extremely hostile and abrasive relationships within the history department. His astounding arrogance, astonishing antagonism, oppressive hostility, aggressive dishonesty, and utter lack of collegiality have functioned to paralyze the department in significant ways, publicly to besmirch the professional and personal reputations of senior faculty members, to intimidate untenured junior faculty members who have understandably come to fear for their professional futures, and to place Brooklyn College in the worst possible light in the press. Ultimately, the students—to whom CUNY and the college have a primary duty—have been poorly served by it all.
The relevant documents in this matter bring into relief a picture far different from the one Professor Johnson has attempted to present. They carefully detail disturbing things, including, but not limited to: Professor Johnson’s harassing, intimidating, and vicious behavior during a recent history department search, including his blatantly humiliating treatment of the untenured colleague who chaired that search (it should be noted that since Professor Johnson sat on the department’s appointments committee, he occupied a position of power vis-à-vis this untenured colleague); his improper manipulation of workload compensation, as well as his violations of policies regarding course prerequisites and the overuse of independent study—matters about which Professor Johnson attempted to deceive his chairperson and other college officials; and his profoundly negative relationships with senior colleagues. As one document states, "[Professor Johnson’s] behavior has had a devastating impact on the department’s ability to conduct personnel and curricular business in anything resembling its normal way….” And this was “precisely because such a large percentage of the department found it difficult, unpleasant, and miserable to work with [Professor Johnson] and to deal with his arrogance, deceit, and misrepresentations.”
Written assessments by Professor Johnson’s colleagues include the following comments: “[Professor Johnson] has created an atmosphere of terror within the department”; “experiences with [Professor Johnson] seem best summarized by the view that he must dominate relationships and win on issues”; “I have never encountered a faculty member whose inability to get along with his colleagues is exceeded only by his determination to blame others for the trouble he creates”; “his mocking contempt for those who disagree with him … [has] sown so much anger and indignation among his colleagues that most [are] not even on speaking terms with him.” No employer could reasonably be expected to keep such an employee, much less grant him virtually permanent employment.
Only the surface has been scratched here. I urge you to investigate this matter thoroughly. Such investigation will compel the conclusion that the real story here is what a detriment Professor Johnson has proven to be to the college.
by Concerned CUNY Person on December 3, 2002 at 2:27 AM