This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: I was alarmed by the statement in the article on authorship by Ms Wilcox¹ saying, "It is unreasonable for institutions to promise that they can protect individuals from retaliation for coming forward to complain through formal grievance procedures." Most organizations have policies on retaliation, especially with regard to grievances. If enforced, these policies can discourage such behavior and ensure the victim of redress. In addition, retaliation such as that mentioned in the public and federal sectors is downright illegal, and university employees fall under Department of Labor workplace standards and laws for their respective states.

Universities have serious ethical and credibility problems if they have such poor control over their employees that they cannot promise to protect individuals from actions contrary to their own grievance policies and that are probably illegal. Favoritism toward senior faculty (eg, in the form of a university "blind eye" to abuses) is . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

Authorship: The Coin of the Realm, The Source of Complaints
Linda J. Wilcox
JAMA. 1998;280(3):216-217.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Measuring Health Care Quality: Comparing and Contrasting the Medical and the Marketing Approaches
Bowers and Kiefe
American Journal of Medical Quality 2002;17:136-144.
ABSTRACT