Take a look at this. A Prof is suspended from university duties for sarcasm and bad body language. Of course, this is not the real reason. That's provided in this paragraph:
Professor Docherty is a prominent critic of the marketization of education who has described the Russell Group - of which the University of Warwick is a member – as "a self-declared elite…even exerting a negative influence over others".
So, a critic of the university sighs and "undermines the authority of the chair." For this he is suspended for nine months. A tribunal rules on the "charges" and is cleared. This suggests that they concluded that he did not sigh, use negative body language or use undue sarcasm (this sounds like a Monty Python charge: what, undue sarcasm! Off with his head!!). As a college union rep put it:
"It beggars belief that an academic can be suspended with no contact with students or colleagues for almost a year while charges are finalised.”
Read that carefully. What the union found unconscionable was that the prof was suspended without charges being finalized. This suggests that so far as the union was concerned the charges themselves were fine. It now seems that undue sarcasm and negative vibes is unacademic. If there is a French dept job, Voltaire need not apply, I suppose.
Part of what makes this funny, of course, is that we all think that this is a one off thing. And most likely it is. But I wish I more strongly believed that this was so. Our fearless leaders don't like being made fun off (i.e. undermined). They don't really like to be laughed at. If this is true of politicians and leaders of industry, why not the bureaucrats that are heading up more and more institutions of higher learning. This would actually be funny, again Monty Python wise, were it not so pathetic.