I spent most of my career working as a radio astronomer at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) headquarters in Charlottesville, VA. The NRAO is a research facility of the NSF receiving over $100 million per year to design, build, and operate state-of-the-art radio observatories such as the VLA. Associated Universities, Inc. (AUI) is the nonprofit federally funded contractor that operates the NRAO for the NSF, so the 500+ people working at the NRAO are legally AUI employees. When I retired in March 2021 after four decades of service as a Tenured Astronomer, the AUI Board of Trustees made me an Astronomer Emeritus. Since the AUI Board made my Emeritus appointment at the recommendation of the NRAO Director, only the AUI Board could revoke it after the Director reversed his recommendation. They did so in November 2022 in retaliation for my public opposition to systemic discrimination by race and sex at the NRAO. I sued AUI in federal court for retaliation made illegal by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and won.
My hope for this website is that exposure to sunlight will deter future attempts by AUI and the NRAO to stifle or compel employee speech, discriminate by race and sex, or retaliate against whistleblowers who oppose institutional discrimination in any form. I hope it will also encourage others to oppose illegal discrimination by their own employers.
Jim Condon Email: condonvaui@gmail.com
While working from home on November 4, 2022, I was surprised to receive a large but remarkably light box from FedEx. It contained only the letter below and a mailing label.
From this letter I first learned that the AUI Board of Trustees had revoked my appointment as an NRAO Astronomer Emeritus and banned me from all NRAO facilities and support services. I was terminated without the due process elements of a fair hearing—an unbiased tribunal, notice of the proposed action and the grounds asserted for it, opportunity to present reasons why the proposed action should not be taken, etc. AUI’s letter didn’t admit why they did this, which was illegal retaliation for an email I sent to the NRAO’s scientific staff on September 14, 2022 opposing systemic discrimination by race and sex in NRAO’s DEI programs.
The NRAO is a research facility of the NSF receiving over $100 million per year to design, build, and operate state-of-the-art radio observatories such as the VLA. AUI is the nonprofit federally funded contractor that operates the NRAO for the NSF, so the 500+ people working at the NRAO are legally AUI employees. Because the NRAO recruits its PhD astronomers in competition with universities, AUI may offer them tenure-track positions and Emeritus appointments upon retirement. When I retired in 2021 after four decades of service as an NRAO Tenured Astronomer, the AUI Board of Trustees made me an Astronomer Emeritus. Since the AUI Board made my Emeritus appointment at the recommendation of the NRAO Director, only the AUI Board could revoke it after the Director reversed his recommendation.
I was dismayed that my research career would be truncated by losing access to NRAO’s physical and digital libraries, critical computer support, and working with my colleagues. By far my worst memory was of removing my personal items from the NRAO Headquarters building, saving what would fit into my small car and losing the rest. After I loaded my car, my NRAO “minder” took my office keys. I looked back on the building where I arrived as a postdoc 50 years ago and was now leaving in disgrace, never to return.
However, unlike the usual depressing reports of suspensions, resignations, terminations, or forced abject apologies from university professors who were canceled for resisting DEI discrimination, this one has a happy ending. I filed a federal lawsuit against AUI for retaliation made unlawful by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It concluded with a final judgment in my favor and against AUI. The court also ordered AUI to pay me $209,171.52 = $130,000 in damages plus $79,171.52 for my litigation costs.
Only about 5% of civil lawsuits end in judgments; most are aborted by settlements containing nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) to conceal wrongdoing by the defendants. As a whistleblower, I wouldn’t accept an NDA, so that I (or anyone else) can use PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) court records for federal Case No. 3:24-cv-00063, Condon v. Associated Universities, Inc. in the Virginia Western District to verify just how AUI and the NRAO retaliated. For example, my lack-of-due-process allegation was confirmed by AUI’s response to Plaintiff’s Interrogatory 27: “Defendant admits that Dr. Condon did not receive advance notice, an opportunity to respond, or a hearing, as to the revocation of his Emeritus status in the discretion of the Board of Trustees.”
I hope that exposure to sunlight will deter future attempts by AUI and the NRAO to stifle or compel employee speech, discriminate by race and sex or retaliate against whistleblowers who oppose institutional discrimination in any form. I hope this report will also encourage others to oppose illegal discrimination by their own employers.
Section 1 outlines the loss of civil rights (imposition of compelled speech, employment discrimination by race and sex) at the NRAO during its gradual descent from equal rights and merit-based hiring to DEI.
Section 2 summarizes my failed efforts to restore them by working within the system to oppose compelled speech and institutional discrimination by AUI/NRAO. They were suppressed by the AUI/NRAO administration led by NRAO Director Tony Beasley.
Section 3: When DEI was inserted into the NRAO’s formerly apolitical mission statement on September 14, 2022, I sent an email to the whole scientific staff opposing AUI/NRAO’s institutional discrimination by race and sex.
Section 4 describes the immediate backlash led by NRAO Director Tony Beasley to discredit my public email, including fabrications alleging its “egregious” violation of NRAO’s computer use policy, seeding a fake “grass-roots” petition against it, a baseless allegation that I defamed NRAO’s HR head, and a fabricated charge that it falsely accused the NRAO of retaliation.
Section 5 exposes AUI’s September 23, 2022 “trial” by which my Astronomer Emeritus status was revoked, with no due process. The baseless charge presented to the Board by NRAO Director Tony Beasley was “his {Dr. Condon’s] continued abusive and disrespectful behavior towards AD/HR Giles” over a period of years before I retired. It downplayed the real reason—retaliation for my September 14, 2022 email publicly opposing DEI discrimination by AUI/NRAO.
Section 6 covers the Condon v. Associated Universities, Inc. federal lawsuit for employer’s retaliation made illegal by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The baseless charge for revoking my Emeritus status at AUI’s “trial” succeeded only because I wasn’t allowed defend myself. For the federal trial, AUI’s Affirmative Defense number 5 backtracked to: “Specifically, the sole reason for revoking Plaintiff’s Emeritus status (access to systems and facilities) was his September 14, 2022 email to the entire scistaff@nrao.edu listserv.” Since I was allowed to defend myself, the federal judge eventually found that “Condon stated a prima facie claim for discrimination” and “Condon establishes AUI’s reason for terminating him was pretex” and denied AUI’s motion for a summary judgment. In order to avoid the impending jury trial, AUI made an “offer of judgement” accepting a judgment in my favor and offering to pay damages and reimburse my legal costs.
Section 7 lists lessons learned from this ordeal—how employees should prepare before openly opposing institutional discrimination, the kinds of backlash they should expect if they do, and ways for victims of retaliation to fight back—followed by my conclusions about this whole affair.
From this letter I first learned that the AUI Board of Trustees had revoked my appointment as an NRAO Astronomer Emeritus and banned me from all NRAO facilities and support services. I was terminated without any due process—an unbiased tribunal, notice of the proposed action and the grounds asserted for it, opportunity to present reasons why the proposed action should not be taken, etc. (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/procedural_due_process). AUI’s letter didn’t admit why they did this, which was retaliation for an email I sent to the NRAO’s scientific staff on September 14, 2022 opposing systemic discrimination by race and sex in NRAO’s DEI programs.
I was dismayed that my research career would be truncated by losing access to NRAO’s physical and digital libraries, critical computer support, and working with my colleagues. By far my worst memory was of removing my personal items from the NRAO Headquarters building, saving what would fit into my small car and losing the rest. After I loaded my car, my NRAO “minder” took my office keys. I looked back on the building where I arrived as a postdoc 50 years ago and was now leaving in disgrace, never to return.
Anatomy of a Retaliation 
