Arbitrator rules in Ollie's favor re: protections | The Boneyard

Arbitrator rules in Ollie's favor re: protections

Joined
Jul 12, 2016
Messages
456
Reaction Score
2,743
Ollie wins ruling on union protection in fight over firing

"The arbitrator in the dispute between UConn and Kevin Ollie says the former basketball coach is protected by a union contract when it comes to the standard the school must meet in proving his ouster was justified."

Just to be clear, this isn't a ruling on whether or not UConn owes Ollie any specific amount of money, just a ruling that Ollie's protections from the AAUP mean a firing for just cause requires "a showing of serious misconduct" not the broader range of offenses that UConn initially claimed it could fire him for.

More hearings coming up.
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
48,016
Reaction Score
161,502
Ollie wins ruling on union protection in fight over firing

"The arbitrator in the dispute between UConn and Kevin Ollie says the former basketball coach is protected by a union contract when it comes to the standard the school must meet in proving his ouster was justified."

Just to be clear, this isn't a ruling on whether or not UConn owes Ollie any specific amount of money, just a ruling that Ollie's protections from the AAUP mean a firing for just cause requires "a showing of serious misconduct" not the broader range of offenses that UConn initially claimed it could fire him for.

More hearings coming up.
Ollie is banned from college sports for three years.
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
2,361
Reaction Score
28,850
Showing serious amount of misconduct looks like it would be pretty easy. Kevin broke specific NCAA rules that caused the university to suffer serious penalties.
And was given a 3 year show cause penalty by the NCAA.
 
Joined
Jul 12, 2016
Messages
456
Reaction Score
2,743
our lovely public unions....just continuing to do everything they can to bankrupt the state.
How on earth is this the union's fault? Unions exist to protect their members. If Benedict didn't want this to happen, he shouldn't have included union representation in Ollie's contract, which isn't common.
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
892
Reaction Score
2,699
I think UConn gave Ollie a number and Ollie said he wants 11 million dollars. When Ollie went full scorched earth I think Uconn decided on 0 dollars for Ollie.
I’m surprised the university doesn’t go on the offensive regarding Ollie. He did enough wrong to get a Three year suspension by the NCAA.
 

CL82

2023 NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
56,511
Reaction Score
206,273
How on earth is this the union's fault? Unions exist to protect their members. If Benedict didn't want this to happen, he shouldn't have included union representation in Ollie's contract, which isn't common.
The coaches have been included in the union contract stemming back to the days when the coaches actually taught classes in addition to coaching. I think this ended right around the time Calhoun started, but the coaches remained as part of the bargaining group.

Ironically, this decision may actually promote a settlement. If the arbiter had found for UConn, it was game over for KO. The requirement of a serious offense for the firing creates a slight element of risk for the univeristy. Not much, since, as pointed out above, an independent body (the NCAA) found that Kevin's actions were so serious that he isn't allowed to coach for three years. Still that slight element of risk is an inducement to settlement. IF KO and his representation are smart they negotiate a modest settlement from UConn and walk away from what has been an absolute train wreck for his reputation. If their offer for the $10M that was left on KO's contract at the time of his termination for just cause is still "$11M," it is a fair bet that UConn let's the arbitration process run its course.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 12, 2016
Messages
456
Reaction Score
2,743
The coaches have been included in the union contract stemming back to the days when the coaches actually taught classes in addition to coaching. I think this ended right around the time Calhoun started, but the coaches remained as part of the bargaining group.
Great point, thanks for the clarification. My understanding is that most universities don't include coaches in the bargaining group.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
6,578
Reaction Score
16,671
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.
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
2,361
Reaction Score
28,850
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.
From my non-lawyer viewpoint, I agree with this. Gives Ollie's attorneys the avenue they wanted to argue over serious misconduct.

But UConn's attorneys then come back and say the school was put on probation based on Ollie's actions, and Ollie himself was given a 3 year suspension. That to me would seem to be the definition of serious misconduct.
 

8893

Curiouser
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,851
Reaction Score
96,490
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.
But UConn's attorneys then come back and say the school was put on probation based on Ollie's actions, and Ollie himself was given a 3 year suspension. That to me would seem to be the definition of serious misconduct.
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.
 

Online statistics

Members online
519
Guests online
4,017
Total visitors
4,536

Forum statistics

Threads
155,775
Messages
4,031,248
Members
9,864
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom