Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="CL82, post: 4693667, member: 44"]
The basis for the arbitrator's ruling was that an individual employee and an employer cannot mutually agree to modify a collective bargaining agreement.  The arbitrator did not say that the context for dismissing Ollie was pretextual, rather he determined that the time for dismissal was premature.  The arbitrator determined that Ollie's offenses were not serious until after the NCAA gave him a three year show cause ruling. If I recall correctly he expressly stated that had Connecticut waited until after the ruling, then Ollie's ask would be considered "a serious breach" which is the relevant standard under the collective bargaining agreement.

Stop and think about what a bad ruling that is. The actually acts didn't change because of the ruling. They either constituted a serious breach, or they did not. The determination by a third-party that they were so significant that they merited kevin getting a show cause order speaks to frustration of purpose of the contract, or perhaps, Kevin's inability to perform his duties, but does not change the nature of his original acts.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

First name of men's bb coach