Arbitrator rules in Ollie's favor re: protections

[Shine33]

If having a court uphold an argument is something that causes you to "lose respect" for the winning party, you need to reexamine your priorities. None of us have the obligation in a lawsuit to let the other side have something -- whether procedurally or a result -- that they are not entitled to under the law.

Whatever you thought of him for filing the suit is fine. But you don't get to rationally lose respect for him winning an argument.

I lost respect for him a while ago and honestly I’m just sick and tired of seeing this case being dragged through the mud. It feel like it’s just continuously scratching a wound that won’t heal and I don’t view Ollie favorably bc of it. I love the UConn basketball program, and as far as I’m concerned even if he wins this case, Ollie has been selfish. He failed as a coach and a leader and committed infractions regardless of the timing of the firing, and I’m sick and tired of seeing his face in the news. You can win a lawsuit and still be a complete DB.

“But you don't get to rationally lose respect for him winning an argument”

That sentence is crap. You can win a legal argument and still be a jerk. You should know this as well as anyone. He has no care or respect for UConn basketball and it didn’t have to be that way AT ALL. He had mentors and brothers by his side and he threw away all of that for the $$$. That’s weak and I’ll never stand by it.

 

[Madmannsucks]

One thing I found humorous are comments like-He cares more about himself than the program. Funny-I have always cared more about my employer than myself...yeah right.

 

[upstater]

Unions obviously operate on a state by state basis even if they are a national union like the AUUP. In NY all staff other than administrators are part of the union. In other states it could be different. The fact that coaches are represented at UConn is not a weird artifact at all. Indeed if he werent covered under his current union contract he would have been covered by whatever other union represents staffers. It’s not weird at all.

 

[Shine33]

One thing I found humorous are comments like-He cares more about himself than the program. Funny-I have always cared more about my employer than myself...yeah right.

Whatever man. His employer wasn’t some 9 to 5 corporate cubicle pump. He had brothers and mentors that were his family that cared about him and he turned on them BEFORE his firing. Not to mention a dream job for most people. Way different. Sry no respect, no empathy from me.

 

[whaler11]

The best thing Ollie has going for him is that the Yard thinks he is screwed. He’ll probably get treble damages by the time its over based off just that.

 

[Kenny11]

I really think most of the BY should stop commenting on Ollie. The anger and emotion seems unhealthy. It’s to a point now where people act as if they hate Ray too, a uconn hero and one of the best things that has ever happened to uconn and Connecticut sports in general. If Ollie were to get a small settlement and this all goes away, members here will still be mad because they want to make sure he gets nothing. I would be good with it, I just want it all to go away and I’m sure Hurley does too.

I’m also tired of hearing “he was offered a settlement already. It’s too late now!” That was a long time ago and things change in lengthy legal battles.

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

Wasn't he fired before the probation and suspension though? If so, I don't think it can be used to justify the termination. It might be admissible to limit damages as after-acquired evidence though.

If UConn self-reported and used precedent of NCAA sanctions for the firing then it’s one-two-BBQ for Ollie’s case.

However now that it’s determined the union will defend him there will most certainly be some kind of settlement IMO.

 

[huskymedic]

They’ll appeal that most likely. Not just for KO but because it has to be entirely unacceptable to UConn that it’s coaches get faculty union protection. It’s absurd on its face. It means they can’t really negotiate terms with them at face value.

This contract expires in 2021. The UConn Board of Trustees can always try to negotiate a change to CBA Recognition clause of the contract to remove Head Coaches/Asst Coaches, etal from the recognized bargaining unit as determined by the National Labor Relations Board during initial certification of the Union. I’ll guarantee you that the Union will want something of value in exchange for doing that (especially now).

 

[Chief00]

Gives KO lawyers ground to quibble over the meaning of serious misconduct in relation to precedent. But, if he was suspended for 3 years by the NCAA, his conduct was such that he would be unable to perform his contract in any case. This would seem to meet a just cause standard by any measure. I can’t see him winning on the merits.

Let’s say UConn did not fire him - the 3 year NCAA just cause prevents him from doing his job for 3 years - so if they rule in his favor - they are ruling that UConn should pay him for 3 years in which by definition he could not perform his job - as a result of his actions.

 

[8893]

I wonder if the requirement that the University meet the “just cause” standard in the CBA means that evidence of how the University has treated other similarly situated employees with respect to the “cause” they articulated, and of which they were aware at the time they decided to fire him, will be admissible.

I haven’t kept up on the play-by-play, but I don’t think they knew of his misstatements to the NCAA at the time that they fired him, did they?

 

[superjohn]

Let’s say UConn did not fire him - the 3 year NCAA just cause prevents him from doing his job for 3 years - so if they rule in his favor - they are ruling that UConn should pay him for 3 years in which by definition he could not perform his job - as a result of his actions.

Good point.

 

[superjohn]

I wonder if the requirement that the University meet the “just cause” standard in the CBA means that evidence of how the University has treated other similarly situated employees with respect to the “cause” they articulated, and of which they were aware at the time they decided to fire him, will be admissible.

I haven’t kept up on the play-by-play, but I don’t think they knew of his misstatements to the NCAA at the time that they fired him, did they?

Forget timeline of everything but pretty sure they knew about his misstatements to NCAA before firing.

 

[8893]

Let’s say UConn did not fire him - the 3 year NCAA just cause prevents him from doing his job for 3 years - so if they rule in his favor - they are ruling that UConn should pay him for 3 years in which by definition he could not perform his job - as a result of his actions.

That is a great damages argument using after-acquired evidence. At least that’s how I would play it. It probably leads to the same result at the end of the day, but you don’t have to prove just cause for the initial firing. Only that you would have fired him once you learned about this anyway.

 

[CTMike]

Like Ben Afleck repeating “RE TAIN ER” in good will hunting, just repeat “SHOW CAUSE” over and over. Can’t fail.

 

[whaler11]

I really don’t get why the NCAA’s opinion that you lied to them matters. It’s not like they are running a court of law. Their opinion on a he said he said argument between Ollie and Miller is really criteria that would be considered?

 

[8893]

I really don’t get why the NCAA’s opinion that you lied to them matters. It’s not like they are running a court of law. Their opinion on a he said he said argument between Ollie and Miller is really criteria that would be considered?

I don’t know what the misstatements were, but if they were proven to be misstatements of material facts, I don’t see how it’s any less serious than the underlying violations themselves, which the contract says can provide just cause—if there was “serious noncompliance.”

 

[whaler11]

I don’t know what the misstatements were, but if they were proven to be misstatements of material facts, I don’t see how it’s any less serious than the underlying violations themselves, which the contract says can provide just cause—if there was “serious noncompliance.”

Proven by who is my point. The NCAA? How do they ‘prove’ anything?

 

[8893]

Proven by who is my point. The NCAA? How do they ‘prove’ anything?

The same way they determine any other violations I suppose. They do investigations, review documents, interview people and make findings? I haven’t reviewed their procedures in almost 20 years and really don’t recall, but we know that they do find violations and that the contract says serious noncompliance with NCAA rules and regulations can be just cause. Ultimately it’s up to the arbitrator, which is why I like the damages argument better.

 

[uconnever]

I really think most of the BY should stop commenting on Ollie. The anger and emotion seems unhealthy. It’s to a point now where people act as if they hate Ray too, a uconn hero and one of the best things that has ever happened to uconn and Connecticut sports in general. If Ollie were to get a small settlement and this all goes away, members here will still be mad because they want to make sure he gets nothing. I would be good with it, I just want it all to go away and I’m sure Hurley does too.

I’m also tired of hearing “he was offered a settlement already. It’s too late now!” That was a long time ago and things change in lengthy legal battles.

I’ve been on the team that agrees UConn should have paid Ollie and been done with it a Loooong time ago. He deserves some of that money in my opinion. He provided a horrible service which I thought he would from the beginning. Drove me nuts as a player, I don’t care what anyone says, but he deserved some of the money. If he turned down the settlement and tried to play hardball, then you except the consequences.

 

[whaler11]

The same way they determine any other violations I suppose. They do investigations, review documents, interview people and make findings? I haven’t reviewed their procedures in almost 20 years and really don’t recall, but we know that they do find violations and that the contract says serious noncompliance with NCAA rules and regulations can be just cause. Ultimately it’s up to the arbitrator, which is why I like the damages argument better.

I’m sure they have their standards. I just don’t get why their conclusions would impact other legal procedings. If I’m an arbitrator - why would I take the NCAA’s word that he ‘lied’?

 

[Husky68]

Let me see the 302's. All of a sudden the NCAA's review and penalty assessment process is "a ok"?

 

[8893]

This case is the university’s shotgun mulch.

 

[Dean Wormer]

I really think most of the BY should stop commenting on Ollie. The anger and emotion seems unhealthy. It’s to a point now where people act as if they hate Ray too, a uconn hero and one of the best things that has ever happened to uconn and Connecticut sports in general. If Ollie were to get a small settlement and this all goes away, members here will still be mad because they want to make sure he gets nothing. I would be good with it, I just want it all to go away and I’m sure Hurley does too.

I’m also tired of hearing “he was offered a settlement already. It’s too late now!” That was a long time ago and things change in lengthy legal battles.

My sentiments exactly. I've said from the beginning, this whole thing just isn't worth it.
But I guess the "not a single penny " crowd, the same ones who told us this was a slam-dunk for the AD and "Ollie has no chance", want to FEEL self-righteous and "get him back" for some mythical betrayal of some kind and another.
Meanwhile, UConn basketball looks like amateur hour, and Hatfields-vs-McCoys to everyone but the BY.
Court cases are fluid and at any point things can change, so why go there?
We need to come together and make this go away. To quote Warden Samuel Norton from The Shawshank Redemption: "Not tomorrow, not after breakfast. But NOW, right NOW"!!

 

[zls44]

I’m sure they have their standards.

Speak for yourself.

 

[whaler11]

Speak for yourself.

I didn’t mean to imply I agree with them.