A senior academic who claimed she couldn't help her 'naturally loud' voice has won more than £100,000 after university bosses grew sick of her 'shouting' and sacked her.
Physicist Dr Annette Plaut - described as a 'Marmite character' - has won the huge compensation payout after being unfairly fired from the Russell Group institution she served for 30 years.
But she has been denied the chance to return to her old job at Exeter University after a judge ruled there was now too much 'hostility' from former colleagues towards her.
At an employment tribunal the £51,000-a-year lecturer admitted she was 'inherently loud', 'naturally argumentative' in conversation, spoke with vigorous hand gestures, and was so passionate about physics she could not restrain herself from bubbling with excitement.
These characteristics were derived from her Jewish heritage, she said.
But while many students and colleagues liked her teaching style, some co-workers found her 'overbearing' and 'highly uncomfortable' to deal with, the hearing was told.
Senior management 'decided Dr Plaut, 60, would not be tolerated further', subjected her to a disciplinary investigation over accusations she 'shouted' at a PhD student and then used it as a 'pretext' to fire her, the panel concluded.
Now, the experimental physics lecturer - an expert on graphene who was the first female in her department - has won £100,969 after successfully suing the university for victimisation, harassment, and unfair dismissal.
But Dr Plaut, whose entire life 'centred on' the university, cannot be re-instated to her job despite asking to return, the employment tribunal in Exeter has now ruled.
In a new judgement published today a judge said there is so much 'hostility' and 'entrenched bias' against Dr Plaut in the 'senior echelons of the university' that a return to her old post is not practical for her.
During her tribunal - details fo which were published last month - Dr Plaut claimed her eastern European Jewish heritage means she has 'inherent characteristics of loudness, and of a conversational style that involves an argumentative style of discussion involving interruption, and much hand movement'.
The academic, whose parents moved from Germany before World War Two, joined the university's physics and astronomy department in 1990.
She insisted 'there was nothing she could do about it' when she became excited and her body language became demonstrative.
"Dr Plaut is passionate about physics," the tribunal heard. "While she can try to restrain her natural personality, it tends to emerge when she becomes engaged in discussion about physics.
"She told her students that was how she was, and that they should not take offence.
"Over the years some colleagues and some students have found this somewhat overbearing, despite Dr Plaut telling students and colleagues that she means nothing by it.
"There was a view amongst some senior members of the department that Dr Plaut had been allowed for years to get away with behaviour which should really not be tolerated.
"Others valued her contribution, and accepted that she was not an unpleasant person even when being loudly argumentative in discussion.
"Dr Plaut says that any negativity towards her by reason of her interpersonal communication style is unconscious racism as it stems directly from her inherent cultural upbringing.
"She finds particularly offensive the suggestion that her loudness is shouting, and finds the application of that word to her to be a great insult.
To sum up the great weight of evidence given to us, the vernacular phrase 'she is a Marmite person' is not inaccurate."
In 2017 the University's Human Resources department became involved in Dr Plaut's teaching style. She took offence to being called 'unnaturally loud' and insisted on being called 'naturally loud'.
By this point, there was friction with the department and 'over time HR gradually became less and less tolerant of Dr Plaut'.
In January 2019 she was suspended for gross misconduct over a 'significantly exaggerated' claim she shouted at a female student and shone a 'laser' in their eyes.
Dr Plaut insisted she had been explaining the scientific concept of saturation and had used a desk light in the student's face to demonstrate it but did apologise.
In a letter giving her a written warning, the university 'accepted that Dr Plaut’s loudness was largely unintentional, but expressed concern at her apparent inability to moderate it'.
When she returned to work in April 2019, her relationship with the university's senior management soured further when she suggested one of her bosses was not open to criticism in his role as head of equality.
Bosses 'seized' upon that comment to launch further disciplinary action against her, even though the academic concerned did not want it pursued.
When, soon after, another of Dr Plaut's students told the university he wished to change lecturers, bosses falsely told him he could only do so if he complained about her.
It resulted in Dr Plaut facing a fresh allegation of 'frequently shouting during meetings with a PhD student causing them stress and anxiety'.
The tribunal found senior management including Provost Janice Kay wanted to get rid of Dr Plaut.
"It is plain that (they) all wanted Dr Plaut dismissed and set that in train", the report said.
The physicist was suspended again and sacked following a disciplinary hearing in December 2019.
Employment Judge Paul Housego criticised the way an academic of such long standing was treated.
At the latest hearing to determine Dr Plaut's compensation, Judge Housego said: "It is difficult to image the depth of humiliation, hurt, stress and worry for Dr Plaut in the period after her suspension.
"Every aspect of her life and future was at risk, and for no good reason, and unfairly. Because of that suspension she was not permitted to talk to her colleagues, and other friends in the university, and so was also cut off from her social network and all likely support.
"The effect of the suspension on Dr Plaut was severe and long term. It was severe anxiety and depression, to medical levels, humiliation by being deprived of her work and isolation by being excluded from almost all meaningful aspects of her life."
In arguing that she should not get her job back, the university - which in December announced that it intends to appeal against the original tribunal decision - said she had a 'boisterous manner' which 'was not well received by students, and that she was not suitable to work in laboratories'.
The university also claimed Dr Plaut could have found other work, but Judge Housego found 'the odds of getting a job as an experimental solid state physicist in a UK University were at best remote', especially in a pandemic.
Judge Housego said: "With regret, the tribunal decided that reinstatement was not practical.
"Dr Plaut had no intention of retiring. Her life was centred on the university where she had worked for 30 years.
"She lives within walking distance of the university. Her social circle was almost totally linked to the university.
"Unfortunately, there is now such hostility to the return of Dr Plaut that it will not prove practical.
"There is entrenched bias against Dr Plaut in the human resources department and in the senior echelons of the university."
