forums

Official The OC Candidates Thread 2.0

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement
/not an employment lawyer

The alleged "for cause" thing doesn't quite make sense timeline-wise. If Gattis did in fact do something that warranted being fired "for cause," wouldn't that have made it easier to terminate him promptly because there is a basis for firing, which usually results in a forfeit of any remaining monies on the rest of the contract (so there's not much to negotiate, if anything)? Instead, it dragged on seemingly forever. The fact that it went on so long suggested to me maybe it had something to do with a buy-out (which then wouldn't be for cause) or something else (like Mario micromanaging). IDK.
 
Advertisement
AlexCane said:
/not an employment lawyer

The alleged "for cause" thing doesn't quite make sense timeline-wise. If Gattis did in fact do something that warranted being fired "for cause," wouldn't that have made it easier to terminate him promptly because there is a basis for firing, which usually results in a forfeit of any remaining monies on the rest of the contract (so there's not much to negotiate, if anything)? Instead, it dragged on seemingly forever. The fact that it went on so long suggested to me maybe it had something to do with a buy-out (which then wouldn't be for cause) or something else (like Mario micromanaging). IDK.
Click to expand...

if he was fired for cause for inserting himself repeatedly into one or more co-ed, it is likely that an investigation was launched by the left-wing/socialist admins of the Univ of Miami and that evidence was obtained, witnesses were called and process was started and concluded, in part to fire him for cause and perhaps to protect the Univ of Miami from liability from an employee going rouge on one or more co-eds. if this is true, and by all accounts it appears to be true, it could have taken weeks if not more.
 
AlexCane said:
/not an employment lawyer

The alleged "for cause" thing doesn't quite make sense timeline-wise. If Gattis did in fact do something that warranted being fired "for cause," wouldn't that have made it easier to terminate him promptly because there is a basis for firing, which usually results in a forfeit of any remaining monies on the rest of the contract (so there's not much to negotiate, if anything)? Instead, it dragged on seemingly forever. The fact that it went on so long suggested to me maybe it had something to do with a buy-out (which then wouldn't be for cause) or something else (like Mario micromanaging). IDK.
Click to expand...

Maybe the admin had to do some due diligence behind the claims to cover our ***. If we 'heard' it happened and fired him, and it turned out it was only a rumor, Gattis would have our balls.
 
AlexCane said:
/not an employment lawyer

The alleged "for cause" thing doesn't quite make sense timeline-wise. If Gattis did in fact do something that warranted being fired "for cause," wouldn't that have made it easier to terminate him promptly because there is a basis for firing, which usually results in a forfeit of any remaining monies on the rest of the contract (so there's not much to negotiate, if anything)? Instead, it dragged on seemingly forever. The fact that it went on so long suggested to me maybe it had something to do with a buy-out (which then wouldn't be for cause) or something else (like Mario micromanaging). IDK.
Click to expand...


Reports of this nature require investigation, an opportunity to respond, etc. That took a couple of weeks.

I'm not sure why you think that this would result in "prompt" termination.

Nothing monetary was negotiated. But the underlying accusations were investigated.
 
Advertisement
rsa coral gables said:
if he was fired for cause for inserting himself repeatedly into one or more co-ed, it is likely that an investigation was launched by the left-wing/socialist admins of the Univ of Miami and that evidence was obtained, witnesses were called and process was started and concluded, in part to fire him for cause and perhaps to protect the Univ of Miami from liability from an employee going rouge on one or more co-eds. if this is true, and by all accounts it appears to be true, it could have taken weeks if not more.
Click to expand...
Is a university employee entitled to an actual hearing?
 
AlexCane said:
Is a university employee entitled to an actual hearing?
Click to expand...

not sure about a hearing in the traditional sense, but they are likely entitled to a response, a retort, so that the process is fair and everyone has an opportunity to be heard. again, everyone is trying to dodge liability.

retort.gif
 
WeBallinBoyz said:
And yet all is forgiven and forgotten if we end up with Johns or Litrell.
Click to expand...
It’s definitely not forgiven and forgotten, no matter who we end up with…this absurd process has tanked any chance we had at bringing in impact outside WR in the portal, early signing day, and signing day. Even with a hr hire we’re still most likely looking at an average at best offense with the lack of weapons at the skill positions.
 
Advertisement
AlexCane said:
Is a university employee entitled to an actual hearing?
Click to expand...


If you're being terminated for cause on a 1.8 million employment contract, I'd guess "yes"...

Gattis wasn't an hourly-wage employee at The Rathskeller.
 
JD4 said:
Thanks for sharing the link.

"the rumor going around UM campus (administrators) is that Gattis was involved in an act/event with multiple co-eds simultaneously that is verboten by UM policies and procedures"


Lmao am I understanding this correctly that he had a threesome with two students or employees?? 🤣

If Gattis put half as much effort into coaching as he did getting laid he might have worked out
Click to expand...

I suspect that if Gattis had not been caught in this alleged verboten act, he'd be the OC in 2023. Cristobal had already set the stage by defending Gattis and saying that his offense worked perfectly well at Michigan. And before the Cristo-bros boo and hiss and claim Cristobal made the decision to fire Gattis during the season, I would advise them that they aren't going to fool anyone into thinking Cristobal was willing take decisive action.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
If you're being terminated for cause on a 1.8 million employment contract, I'd guess "yes"...

Gattis wasn't an hourly-wage employee at The Rathskeller.
Click to expand...
I saw with mine two eyes Gattis during the winter break driving around recruits during a big recruiting weekend. Let's say all this "for cause" stuff is true and an investigation or process had to play out. If true, wouldn't he be temporarily suspended from team activities while that process is being played out? I mean, if something so inappropriate was done that it justifies "for cause," why would he still be representing the university?

I dunno. This isn't my cup of tea. But if a dude did a bad job and also did something reprehensible, why can't he be fired immediately and if any lawyer speaks up and demands that the remaining contract be honored, you shove these allegations up their rear and say "go for it" and all this stuff hits the light of day. You can negotiate with someone after a contract has been terminated and find a resolution.
 
CanesSkins26 said:
It’s definitely not forgiven and forgotten, no matter who we end up with…this absurd process has tanked any chance we had at bringing in impact outside WR in the portal, early signing day, and signing day. Even with a hr hire we’re still most likely looking at an average at best offense with the lack of weapons at the skill positions.
Click to expand...
Poor take, just wrong on so many levels. There are quite literally 100 OC’s that don’t have talented guys and yet produce explosive and efficient offenses.

Greg Bryant is clearly waiting on us to make a hire, otherwise he would have signed somewhere already. I’d reckon we add another weapon as well on top of that, or take two if Bryant goes elsewhere. But even if we add just one guy, we’re still putting up 27+ ppg if it’s Johns of Littrell. No doubt in my mind. I mean there’s been way more too many teams with worse personnel that experiences success on offense, due to their coaches’ ability to scheme players open and pinpoint weaknesses.
 
my question. what did mario sell to recruits about the offense?? about the future idk that's what gets me
 
AlexCane said:
/not an employment lawyer

The alleged "for cause" thing doesn't quite make sense timeline-wise. If Gattis did in fact do something that warranted being fired "for cause," wouldn't that have made it easier to terminate him promptly because there is a basis for firing, which usually results in a forfeit of any remaining monies on the rest of the contract (so there's not much to negotiate, if anything)? Instead, it dragged on seemingly forever. The fact that it went on so long suggested to me maybe it had something to do with a buy-out (which then wouldn't be for cause) or something else (like Mario micromanaging). IDK.
Click to expand...
For that type of termination there is a process / procedure that involves a formal internal investigation, UM counsel, and a variety of interviews. It was also commented on that as the allegations were brought forward ... more individuals came forward as well with allegations. HR had 100% control once it reached that point. It was no longer a football performance review issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement
Back
Top