THE REFERENCE LETTER: 1993-1994
Lies, damned lies, and a few statisticians.
With an attribution to
BENJAMIN DISREALI
I came to Canada as a graduate student at Simon Fraser University in September 1991. My experience at SFU had been a pleasant one until a high-paying job opportunity came along in the autumn of 1993.
THE REFERENCE LETTER
Background
By the end of summer 1993, I had finished all the required courses for the Master of Science program in Statistics at SFU. For my project, it was decided that I use one of the Case Studies that I had participated in at the 1993 Annual Meeting of Statistical Society of Canada held in June of that year. By all accounts, my presentations at the conference were well received. Besides, I chaired one of its two Graduate Sessions.
Coming from a mathematics and statistics background, I had always been interested in business and economics. By the end of summer, not only was I about to finish my Master’s program, I had also passed five actuarial exams with very good scores, all by working on my own. My plan was to both look for a job primarily in actuary field, and to apply for Ph.D. study in Finance where quantitative skills became increasingly useful. In late summer, I sent out introductory letters to selected Finance professors at various universities, expressing my interests in their respective Ph.D. programs. One of them, addressed to Mr. Mihir Bhattacharya at the University of Michigan, brought me an unexpected employment opportunity.
The Employment Opportunity
At the end of August 1993, I received a phone call from Mr. Yanxiu Li who was working for Mr. Mihir Bhattacharya at Merrill Lynch in New York.
According to Mr. Li during our initial conversations, Mr. Bhattacharya had already quit teaching and become a manager at Merrill Lynch. Mr. Bhattacharya noticed from my letter that Mr. Li and I had both studied at the same university in China. So he asked Mr. Li to give me a call as they were hiring a Quantitative Analyst. Evidently, Mr. Li did not know me before.
Of course, I was interested in such an opportunity. In fact, a lot of Finance Ph.D.s ended up working on Wall Street. Mr. Li tested my knowledge on derivative pricing (I had taken graduate level course in this area). He also asked me several questions on Multivariate Analysis (My master’s project uses MA quite extensively). Apparently satisfied, he told me how much I would expect to make in my first year, in an effort to persuade me away from pursuing a Finance Ph.D. To impress me, he boasted his own six-figure pay, saying that he did not even remember his salary, but that people on Wall Street cared only about their annual bonuses.
A few days later, I sent them a copy of my resume with Mr. K. Laurence Weldon, my senior supervisor and Mr. Richard A. Lockhart, my supervisor listed as my references, together with their phone numbers. Soon after they received my resume, Mr. Li called me again. This time, he said that Mr. Bhattacharya would like me to ask Mr. Lockhart to write a reference letter for me as “Mihir knows him [Mr. Lockhart] very well.”
The Reference Letter
In mid-September, I approached Mr. Lockhart about writing the letter. His initial response was that he did not know Mr. Bhattacharya at all. But he Okayed my request matter-of-factly.
A little puzzled, I told Mr. Li about Mr. Lockhart’s claim. Mr. Li simply repeated what Mr. Bhattacharya had told him, i.e., Mr. Bhattacharya knew Mr. Lockhart very well. Obviously, neither of us was alarmed by the discrepancy.
On or around October 7, 1993, after a special Statistics seminar in the afternoon, I volunteered to help Mr. Michael A. Stephens return the video equipment. On our way to the equipment office, Mr. Stephens told me that he heard from Mr. Lockhart that I was applying for a job. I was a little surprised that he knew about the Merrill Lynch job, even though I knew he and Mr. Lockhart collaborated quite closely academically. He then inquired whether I was actively looking for a job or just happened to be applying for that particular one. I told him that that particular job opportunity came about by chance. He then said that “we’d like to keep you in Canada”. I regarded it as a compliment, although I felt he used too much force in saying so. On parting, he commented, in a softer and more sympathetic tone, that “everybody needs a job”.
On or around October 15, having not heard anything from Mr. Lockhart about the letter, I knocked on his office. He told me that “a letter had been sent”. I left wondering why he did not inform me at the time of mailing. And I assumed naturally that the letter had been sent by him. I phoned Mr. Li to update him.
Opportunity Lost
In late October and early November, I called Mr. Li several times to see if they had received the letter. However, it seemed that Mr. Li would not take my calls.
In the morning of November 10, I got hold of Mr. Li at work and we talked for about 15 minutes. Right off he sounded very nettled by the letter, giving me a sense of righteous indignation. As for my application, he told me that I had been passed up the opportunity and they were considering someone else. But he suggested vaguely that they might be hiring again at the end of the year. When pressed further about the details of the letter, he only said that “it’s generally positive, but not overwhelmingly positive.” He said that he had made a copy of the letter for himself, hinting that he would help me straighten things out in the future.
A few days later, we had another conversation. This time he sounded calmer and revealed that they had wanted the reference letter in lieu of an interview. “You should catch the opportunity when it comes.” He said. He told me that on Wall Street, things move fast and that they had already identified another candidate for the job. But he also promised to send me some Wall Street job information. (I would later need to remind him several times before he actually sent out the information, which was indeed very valuable. It was printed out from their Bloomberg Terminal, which was generally only used by Wall Street firms. Years later, those job info would become available to the public when Bloomberg started its website.)
THE ENSUING BULLYING AND HARASSMENT AT SFU
I thought I simply lost an employment opportunity, possibly due to a not-so-strong reference letter. I did not feel too bad about it because my original plan was to pursue a Finance Ph.D. anyway. What hurt was the ensuing bulling and harassment I experienced in the department.
Mr. Lockhart’s Dirty Joke
On the day of my project pre-defense (I don’t remember the exact date but it should be in November or December of 1993), Mr. Weldon, Mr. Lockhart and I had a lunch together at the Diamond Restaurant on campus.
The pre-defense and the lunch were both routine in our program. What’s unusual in my case was a dirty joke Mr. Lockhart told Mr. Weldon during the lunch while I was the only other person at the table.
Mr. Lockhart began by asking Mr. Weldon: “Did I tell you the joke about that friend of mine who lives in a basement?” He then went on to say that he went to see this friend of his one day and found out that “he was making porno movies in his basement”. That was odd to me as I had never heard Mr. Lockhart talking dirty like that. Mr. Weldon did not appear to be enjoying it either but he did not stop Mr. Lockhart from telling it. I had no idea that I was the intended audience of the “joke” at the time because they were talking with each other. In fact, they were talking as if I were not there. However, I was living in a basement at the time, like a lot of international students. I tried not to think too much of it.
Dirty Joke Repeated
On January 11, 1994, at the start of a new semester, I defended my project before the Examining Committee with Mr. Michael Stephens as the External Examiner. A couple of notes during and after the defense:
Mr. Stephens asked me to simply read a paragraph from my project without raising any follow-up questions or making any comments. I found it strange. The part he asked me to read was very well written, I should add.
Mr. Lockhart said that he was “out of question” and was very quiet throughout the defense. (During pre-defense, he raised one question, using male/female population analogy, in order to lead to his perceived deficiency in my project. I pointed out that his analogy was not appropriate in this particular Case Study due to the sampling scheme used, [and thus no such deficiency exists in my project].)
Mr. Lockhart repeated exactly the same dirty “joke” as he did on the day of my pre-defense in exactly the same manner, i.e., as if I were not there.
What’s more, they talked to each other about their daughters in the same manner as they did the joke, i.e., as if I were not there. This part of the conversation began with their asking each other of their daughters’ respective ages (I don’t remember; but vaguely that they were minors), and ended with Mr. Lockhart saying that his daughter was too young and that Mr. Weldon’s daughter “needs to be entertained.”
After lunch, Mr. Lockhart went to the washroom. Both Mr. Weldon and I were waiting for him near the restaurant entrance. All of a sudden, Mr. Weldon used a gesture to invite me to the washroom, without uttering a word. After I shook my head, he went in himself.
A few days after my project defense, I had another conversation with Mr. Li. He told me that on Wall Street, people talk about “class warfare” everyday, and that sometimes you have to fight even your own boss. I was not sure if he was implying that Mr. Weldon had something to do with the reference letter.
Unwelcome Remark by Mr. Stephens
One day shortly after my project defense, while I was duplicating my project in the copy room of the general office, Mr. Stephens stepped in. He pointed to the dedication page and asked me to hold it up for him as if he couldn’t see. I told him that it’s a dedication to my parents. He commented “that’s a waste of paper” and walked away.
Of course, having been the External Examiner of my project, he should have read my dedication already.
Mr. K. Laurence Weldon
Before my project defense, I had always thought that the relationship between Mr. Weldon and me was a good professional one. He was especially proud of me after the SSC’93 conference. I never thought that he would do things behind my back.
In mid-October 1993, I told him about my plan to take GMAT and to apply for Ph.D. study in Finance. (I never told him about the unexpected employment opportunity with Merrill Lynch. I did tell him that I was looking for jobs and get his permission to be one of my references.) It was around this time that he told me for the first time that he had a statistical consulting business on the side, and “all you need to do well [in that business] is good ideas”. Having been my boss for two years by then, I think it’s fair to say that he knew, as well as I did, that one of my strengths was my ability in solving problems. I was not entirely sure whether he was trying to see if I was interested in working for him. I did not ask. For me, working for an insurance company or studying for a Finance Ph.D. was far more attractive.
My project writing went on quite slow initially, on pace with Mr. Weldon, although most of my work had already been done before the conference in the summer. Being my boss, he could easily control my progress by setting up appointments etc. In retrospect, I think Mr. Weldon, acting together with Mr. Lockhart and Mr. Stephens, deliberately slowed down the progress of my project to further diminish my chance of getting that high-paying job. They probably knew that even with the initial rejection by Merrill Lynch, I still had a chance till the end of that year. And I could have easily finished my project by the end of 1993.
On December 12, I had another conversation with Mr. Li. He asked me casually if I had a US Visa. I think that’s a hint that, from his or Mr. Bhattacharya’s point of view, it would be helpful for me to get hired if I could go to New York and meet them in person, possibly around Christmas. Coincidentally, Mr. Weldon at this time was pushing me on the project, in contrary to his earlier slow pace. In fact, I remember one late evening just before Christmas, he called me in my office, apparently from his home as if to just check on me. “I knew you would be there,” he said suggestively. There was neither discussion of my project, nor holiday greeting. That call itself was a bit odd as we rarely needed to call each other on the phone. Aside from our periodic face-to-face meetings on my project, most of our communications were done through email.
Not long after my project defense, I ran into Mr. Weldon at the stairs near the general office one day. He was coming down while I was going up. After brief exchange of greetings, we parted. Then I heard him from behind me: “He’s always so nice. I’ve never seen him angry.” His use of the word angry was very unusual to me because I did not see any reason why I should be angry at anybody or at anything at the time. Of course, this being a passing comment, I was not entirely sure if he was talking about me, to me or neither. (There was nobody else around when it took place.)
Leering by Mr. Lockhart
Suspecting that there might be a serious problem with the reference letter, on or around June 3, 1994, I asked Mr. Lockhart for a copy when I saw him outside the department general office. Leering at my lower body, he said that “I’ll let you know my attitude after I look into that” and walked away. He never did give or show me the letter. I remember this incident clearly not only because I was hurt, but I also learned the many meanings of the word “attitude”.
The First Threatening Call
In late summer of 1994, I received my first ever threatening call at home since I came to Canada. Among the things the anonymous caller said were: “go back to your own country” and “I know where you live. I’m coming over right now.”
As a visa student, I would have had to go back to China after finishing my study at SFU, had I not been admitted into the Finance Ph.D. Program at the University of British Columbia.
I believe the call was from an agent of the defendant. Having bullied and harassed me, all they wanted was for me to leave the country.
The First Leering Incident
Mr. Lockhart’s leering at me was the second such incident at SFU. The first one (and the only other one) was done by the Chairwoman of the department.
In late January 1993, I received a letter from Canadian Institute of Actuaries, confirming that I ranked, among all Canadian candidates, 2nd and 5th respectively in Course 100 and Course 110 of Society of Actuaries exams. Noticing that other students’ achievements got recognized by the department on its weekly (or bi-weekly) newsletter, I approached Ms. Katherine Heinrich, department chair, sometime in February or March 1994. However, not only did she refuse my request without an explanation, she was also very rude to me.
Feeling that I was not being treated fairly, I contacted the Ombudsoffice of SFU Student Society. The Ombudsperson resolved the problem quickly. I was told that I just needed to bring the relevant document to Ms. Heinrich. (I had brought the letter with me previously but she simply brushed me away as if I was a nuisance to her.) When I went to see Ms. Heinrich again and gave her my document, she didn’t say much this time but leered at my lower body.
She or her office did write a brief item about my achievement in a subsequent issue of the newsletter. However, it was done with an insinuation attached. The immediate item, or a couple of items after the one on my exam achievements, was a piece of news about some other student(s) getting caught cheating in exam(s). (The newsletter is to be obtained.)
I later read on SFU website that in 1997, Ms. Heinrich was a member of the Task Force that created or revised the university’s Campus Harassment Policy. Is there anything more ironic?
University Hiring
For both the Spring and Summer semesters of 1994, the department had a job opening for the (only) full-time staff position at the Statistical Consulting Service. Mr. Weldon was in charge of the hiring process, or served as a coordinator. He announced the job opening throughout the department via a public email. In response, I asked him about the procedure to apply. But he told me that his email was not addressed specifically to me and that I was “not encouraged to apply”. I never had the chance of being considered for this position.
I filed a complaint with the university about the hiring process in late spring or early summer 1994. However, the university’s response was slow and unsatisfactory. Despite my several follow-up calls, nobody from the university ever interviewed me about my complaint. By the time I got a lame reply in late summer, I was already about to leave SFU, as was known to the university.
CHAPTER REMARKS
During my first two years at SFU, I never experienced any bulling or harassment. It was the potential high-paying job opportunity that triggered the professors’ aggressiveness.
When Mr. Stephens told me that they wanted to keep me in Canada, it was not a compliment as I initially thought. He said it out of jealousy. It revealed the professors’ desire of not letting me work on Wall Street.
My best guess was that, since they could not find anything really bad about me to say, they fabricated a lie about my sexual orientation to create a friction between me and potential employers. Talk about intellectual creativity!
Now that neither the professors nor the employers would release the letter to me, why wouldn’t they make up some other lies, or attack my character in the letter?
To ensure their lies would be forever covered up, they dragged their daughters into the whole shenanigan. Given their ages, they could be easily manipulated. Talk about unprofessional conducts of professors!
If they were ever serious about setting me up with one of their daughters, they would have ample opportunity to do so. But I was never being introduced to any of them. I did not even know their names. Instead, these rumors created hatred toward me and I became the target of bullying and harassment in my last several months at SFU.
Their real intention was to get rid of me, contrary to their claim of wanting to “keep me in Canada”. After the reference letter to Merrill Lynch, I asked Mr. Weldon to write another reference letter for me in connection to my Ph.D. applications. That letter was very poorly done, not in contents, but in forms. For example, it was printed on a blank paper rather than on SFU letterhead; it did not even have his return address. Had UBC not been so close that I could go for an interview, I do not think I would have been admitted into their Ph.D. program.
They were so blatant in their conspiracy because I was a visa student from another country.
