analyzed those influenza vaccine potency tests performed by Dr. Morris during 1965 and 1966. The results of this analysis (Attachment A) show that in 1965 of 11 vaccines which were tested and certified as potent 2 had actually failed the required potency tests; in 1966 of the 11 vaccine lots which were tested and certified as potent 6 had failed the required mouse potency tests. In my opinion, to have certified as potent vaccine lots which failed the required potency tests was dishonest and a betrayal of a trust to provide the public with potent vaccines-one of the triad of the DBS mission. I also feel strongly that, for no other reason, this betrayal of a public trust ought to be sufficient reason to justify termination of Dr. Morris' employment in the Division. However, I will continue with some other reasons. 6. Second. Dr. Morris repeatedly ignores and exhibits disdain for administrative duties and responsibilities; in addition he has repeatedly disobeyed orders and was insubordinate to his Supervisors. 7. This has been common knowledge (substantiated by evidence submitted in Attachment B) and has been not only my experience, but also that of my predecessor (Dr. Shelokov), Dr. Leon Jacobs (previous Scientific Director, DBS), and Dr. Roderick Murray (Director, DBS). Because of Dr. Morris' unsatisfactory performance he has not been receiving his within-grade step pay increases since August 1966, and Dr. Morris has not taken official exception to these decisions. Reasons for the decisions to withhold his within-grade increases have been stated in previous memoranda (Attachment C). 8. There are many examples of Dr. Morris' refusal to comply with certain rules and regulations and to execute administrative responsibilities. Attachment D contains documents which bear witness that on many occasions Dr. Morris submitted manuscripts for publication without prior approval and administrative clearance. Concerning his most recent infraction, Dr. Morris had an article published which has never been approved and cleared by the appropriate officials. Dr. Morris has compounded his error by stating that he did get approval. This we know is not true, and, although he has been officially requested to supply the formal approval papers, he has not done so. He is unable to do so because no approval was ever given. 9. Recently, I have had to reassign Dr. Morris' last technical assistant because of his (Dr. Morris) failure (or should I say refusal?) to insure that his assistant comply with the rules and regulations concerning working hours. In fact, Dr. Morris thwarted my efforts at every turn in this matter. It would be virtually impossible to administer a laboratory without the cooperation and active participation of the senior professionals. Dr. Morris' refusal to execute his responsibility to supervise the conduct of personnel assigned to him is a manifestation of dereliction in the performance of his duties. Attachment E contains documents relating to these events. 10. Third. Dr. J. Anthony Morris has demonstrated a willful disregard for the safety of other personnel. 11. During 1964 and 1965 Dr. Morris (without prior notification and approval of his Laboratory Chief) harbored in building 29, Room 309-11 animal room mice infected with scrapie virus. He made no attempt to insure any degree of isolation and many unsuspecting individuals were unknowingly exposed to a virus that many competent investigators feared was potentially dangerous to man. 12. Fourth. Dr. J. Anthony Morris has had unauthorized communications with licensed manufacturers and has willfully attempted to prevent DBS from being informed about these. 13. This was in direct violation of a long-standing policy of DBS, and his willful violation was compounded by the fact that he has been repeatedly receiving reminders that he was not to negotiate with DBS licensed manufacturers. Since we are a federal regulatory agency we must insure that a proper relationship exists between the Division and the manufacturers of biologic products we regulate. Dr. Morris has been informed repeatedly both by my predecessor and myself that he must obtain prior approval before attempting any negotiation with any licensed manufacturer. Yet, in February 1969 he made arrangements with Dr. Haff, Associate Director of Virology, Smith Kline & French (SKF) Laboratories to collaborate with them to - test samples of rabbit sera for the presence of endogenous viruses. Dr. Morris did not notify his supervisor of these arrangements of which I became aware accidentally during a conversation I had with members of the staff of SKF. I requested Dr. Haff to send to me a copy of his correspondence with Dr. Morris in order that no confusion would develop which might eventually compromise the position of either DBS or SKF in SKF's pending license application to manufacture rubella vaccine. 14. In a letter dated 24 February 1969 Dr. Haff requested from Dr. Morris an exchange of materials so that both could search for viruses in the RIT colony. In December 1969 I was told by Dr. Huygelen of RIT that subsequent to receiving Dr. Haff's letter, Dr. Morris telephoned Dr. Haff to notify him that he would refuse to send any reagents to Dr. Haff if Dr. Haff insisted in honoring my request to keep my office (and hence the Division) informed of the negotiations. This form of behaviour is unwarranted and embarrassing to manufacturers who must deal with the Division, a regulatory agency. Attachment F describes in more detail this event. 15. Fifth. Dr. J. Anthony Morris makes a positive effort to provoke his supervisors and to thwart his supervisor's attempts to administer a laboratory. 16. It is my opinion that Dr. Morris is unable to develop a satisfactory relationship with his supervisors. Attachment G provides evidence that Dr. Morris has and continues to act in such a way calculated to provoke his supervisors. Attachment H is a notarized affadavit of a former LVR secretary concerning an event described in Attachment G. I have described my concern about Dr. Norris' provocative and demoralizing behaviour and how this behaviour adversely affects other members of the LVR staff. G 17. Paragraph 8 (Attachment ) describes how Dr. Morris came to me and requested another chance by starting on a clean slate-a situation which had occurred with Dr. Shelokov several times. I consented to support Dr. Morris' research activities on the condition that he would keep them in line with the Laboratory's and Division's mission. Paragraphs 9, 10 and 11 (Attachment 6) describe several subsequent events which indicated that Dr. Morris had no intention of honoring his commitment to me. This type of deceitful behaviour had been a constant feature of his relationahip with Dr. Shelokov, and Dr. Morris was now acting similarly with me. Dr. Morris' inability or refusal to cooperate with and hia witorta to deceive and demoralize his supervisors precludes hi ever becoming a useful member of this Laboratory's staff. I must state that Dr. Morris' willfully deceitful behaviour wught to be considered in an over-all evaluation of reasons to support my recommendation that Dr. Morris be permanently suspended from our atatt. 18. It is difficult for me to understand how and why we continue to have Dr. Morris remain on the Division's staff. He contributes nothing to our Division's mission, yet he continues to draw a federal paycheck. His intolerable performance, which I have described above, attests to his dishonesty, his betrayal of a public trust, his refusal to abide by administrative rules and regulations by which we all must operate, his lack of sensitivity for the feelings of others, and his seemingly positive effort to provoke his supervisors and to thwart his supervisors' attempt to administer a laboratory. Frankly, we are tired of playing games with this man and we can no longer tolerate, nor can we justify, his presence in LVR. I am recommending that we terminate Dr. Morris' employment in the Division for the reasons given above. |