Verdict in Whistleblower lawsuit against the University expected today
Joseph Lichterman and Stephanie Steinberg
Daily Staff ReportersNovember 15th, 2009
A verdict is expected today in the wrongful termination suit being brought against the University’s Board of Regents by a former University graduate student.
Robert McGee, 54, claims he was fired from his job as a research assistant for reporting his supervisor’s safety violations in February 2008.
The jury will finish hearing deliberations at 10 a.m. this morning. A verdict is expected later this afternoon.
McGee testified in the Washtenaw County Circuit Court last Tuesday that on Feb. 16, 2008, Michael Hartman, professor of nuclear engineering and radiological sciences, put him at risk of exposure to a highly radioactive isotope after Hartman ignored access restrictions on a lab adjacent to his and entered without proper safety equipment.
Shortly after the incident, McGee sent an e-mail reporting his possible radiation exposure to the University’s Radiation Safety Service. He was fired the next week.
McGee took the jury through his day on Feb. 16, 2008, when Hartman asked him to help install a safety door in Nuclear Engineering Prof. Kimberlee Kearfott’s laboratory on North Campus. Kearfott’s lab contains a source of Cesium 137, a highly radioactive isotope, which is held in a machine. Only four people have permission to be in the vicinity of the material and McGee and Hartman are not among the four.
McGee testified that he agreed to go with Hartman because he trusted him. McGee said when he asked Hartman if he had Kearfott’s permission to enter her lab, Hartman replied that he did.
Once inside, the two discovered they couldn’t install the door. Though they didn’t have radiation protection devices like a survey meter or dosimeter, Hartman continued to walk further into the lab.
Hartman then turned to McGee and asked him if the machine that contained the Cesium 137 was on or off, McGee testified.
McGee said he thought Hartman knew what he was doing, and when he proved he didn’t know if they were protected from radiation, McGee said he immediately left.
McGee said he then went home and called Joseph Miklos, an Occupational Safety and Environmental Health coordinator for the University, to find out if he had been exposed to radiation.
In his testimony last Thursday, Miklos said he told McGee that he couldn’t have been exposed to radiation because the Cesium had been inactive since December.
However, McGee said in his testimony that Miklos told him at the time that he didn’t know for sure and that Kearfott would have a better answer.
McGee contacted Kearfott, who became upset upon hearing that McGee and Hartman entered her lab without permission, contrary to what Hartman told McGee.
The two then met at Kearfott’s lab to check on the machine and Kearfott found that it was off, McGee testified.
In her testimony last Thursday, Kearfott said the safety system protecting the source was not working correctly prior to when the two men entered the lab, but claimed this would have made it more difficult for the men to be exposed to radiation.
McGee claimed he was terminated for reporting Hartman’s safety violations to Radiation Safety Service.
In his testimony Friday, Hartman said he wanted to dismiss McGee weeks before the incident because he was not fulfilling his job responsibilities.
Hartman testified that the timing of McGee’s termination was coincidental and that it did not have to do with the incident in Kearfott’s lab.
McGee started working for Hartman in July 2007, when Hartman became director of the Neutron Science Lab.
McGee’s job was to finish the safety systems and shielding for a neutron generator in the lab. Hartman testified that McGee agreed to have the projects completed by fall 2007, but that he ended up finishing the shielding in September 2007.
On Dec. 4 Hartman said he e-mailed McGee a number of jobs he wanted to be completed by the end of the year, in addition to the completion of the safety system.
Over the next two months, Hartman said McGee had only finished four of the tasks on the list.
Hartman testified that he contacted William Martin, chair of the Nuclear Engineering and Radiological Sciences department, about terminating McGee at the end of the semester.
However, Hartman said Martin encouraged him to keep McGee and proposed that the department pay for McGee’s winter 2008 salary.
Hartman complied with Martin’s request, but told McGee he wanted the safety system completed by Feb. 1.
According to Hartman, McGee constantly missed deadlines and didn’t show up to work.
In his testimony, McGee said he had a good relationship with Hartman until the safety violations occurred. He cited an instance in January in which his friend passed away and that Hartman had been very sympathetic — letting him take time off to attend the funeral.
But, McGee said, Hartman’s friendly demeanor changed after the incident. He said Hartman didn’t speak to him at work.
On Feb. 19 Hartman sent McGee an e-mail that included targeted dates for McGee to complete his assignments. Hartman also asked McGee to call him to talk about the schedule.
After McGee did not respond, Hartman sent him an e-mail on Feb. 20 informing McGee of his dismissal, but said he would be paid for rest of the semester.
The seven-member jury was dismissed Friday evening after nine and a half hours of testimony. The trial was scheduled to resume this morning at 10 a.m, and the jury is expected to reach a verdict this afternoon.
Printed from www.michigandaily.com on Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:47:28 -0500