|
Post by Tom on Sept 13, 2019 9:42:31 GMT -5
The sum and substance of Gibbons' complaint is this: From the T&G article If true, this could be in violation of the college's policies and procedures. Kind of nitpicking, but that's what would happens in court Coach Gibbons met with the investigator (Hoag). I think it is safe to assume that the allegations were discussed at this meeting. The T&G says Coach Gibbons didn't get to read the final report and discuss it with HR (who was not the investigator). Nothing in the above policy says those things have to happen. He claims the investigator said they would happen, but it's not in the policy as written above. I haven't seen where Coach Gibbons was denied the opportunity to respond to the allegations or present names of potential witnesses. This might have happened, but no where has it been stated.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 13, 2019 9:43:03 GMT -5
As to claims of racism...I once had a grad student claim that her grade was a "C" because of my racist attitude toward her. I had explained she got the "C" because of my generosity since she had missed 6 of our 15 classes. and could have been given an "F" according to school attendance policy. She still said to him that she believed the grade was racist. When my chairman followed up on this Wednesday class (as he had to with such a claim) I asked him what the student's race was on Mondays. He seemed startled but he said, African-American, of course. I pointed out that she got an "A" in that class (where she had perfect attendance). I added that I was apparently not racist on Mondays, only on Wednesdays. The complaint was thrown out.
It is sad that playing the race card is becoming almost automatic today.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Sept 13, 2019 10:07:09 GMT -5
Getting a great education here on Title IX. Appears that Federal law can be weaponized. In this case it may end up ultimately being lose/lose/lose. BG's reputation and health is damaged. The complaintant "wins" so she has no action against HC, but this incident is part of her history now. The College has it's reputation take another hit, at least in some quarters, and between legal fees, insurance premiums and settlement costs, loses money and the buzz over another scandal crowds out the PR staff's best efforts to get flattering news to stick.
Actually, all the Assistants may have gained something because if BG just left after the season as a non-renewed coach, there may have been a national search with the new head coach bringing in her own team of Assistants.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Sept 13, 2019 10:22:39 GMT -5
From the Telegram It's tough to say that doesn't need to be dealt with quickly, especially given the nature of a coaching staff and the close proximity the accused and accuser would be required to work within Who were the minority players in 2017-18? There was exactly one in 2018-19 and she was a freshman at the time, so not part of the previous team. Simply don't remember any, but most likely I am wrong about that. Infiniti, Miranda and Janay in 2017-2018. In 2018-2019, Miranda, Janay and Oluchi were members of the team that would be considered to meet minority status. Infiniti, Miranda and Janay are bi-racial.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Sept 13, 2019 12:15:57 GMT -5
Who were the minority players in 2017-18? There was exactly one in 2018-19 and she was a freshman at the time, so not part of the previous team. Simply don't remember any, but most likely I am wrong about that. Infiniti, Miranda and Janay in 2017-2018. In 2018-2019, Miranda, Janay and Oluchi were members of the team that would be considered to meet minority status. Infiniti, Miranda and Janay are bi-racial. Thanks, one I should have remembered, the other two, at least on tv (only place I've seen the women play) hard to tell.
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Sept 13, 2019 12:43:23 GMT -5
Just a quick review: - Coach Gibbons tells an assistant that if she shows him during a game again she would be fired. The next day at a staff meeting Coach Gibbons tells all of the assistants it's important to appear united in front of the players, but he is the head coach and his word is final. - Prior to the staff meeting, the assistant coach goes to HR and says Coach Gibbons threatened her - Investigations shows nothing. No action taken. Back to business - Same assistant goes back HR with another complaint. We don't know what, but Coach Gibbons says it was that he didn't listen to his assistants - Not much there. No immediate action taken - At some point after the second meeting, the assistant coach sent an E-mail saying that Coach Gibbons displayed racism toward her and some minority players - Coach Gibbons was suspended - Coach Gibbons was fired. At the press conference the statement was only about team performance. At no point did the school even hint that the suspension was a contributing factor to the termination. The school however did not come out and say that it was not a factor ------------------------------------------------------ It stinks for Coach Gibbons that the timing of the suspension and termination might lead one to conclude that is why he got fired. Fifteen years ago, the school might have told the assistant that she cried "wolf" too often and she should stop throwing mud on the wall to see if something sticks. That response doesn't work in 2019. In my opinion. Coach Gibbons probably got a raw deal with the suspension. His reputation was damaged because, in absence of facts, many people assumed the worst. On the other hand, I'm not sure that makes HC civilly liable. Unless they are given leave to publicly release the entire report, is it the school's fault if some people assume the worst? Even if you release everything, some will still believe the worst. In 2019, was it even an option for the school to not investigate the racism accusation, even if the prior two complaints from this assistant were deemed frivolous? Coach Gibbons is mad, and rightly so. In my opinion, he is the victim of a hyper-sensitive assistant in an environment where everyone must curtail to the whims of the hyper-sensitive. Holy Cross has deep pockets and that's an easy target. He's mad that HC didn't back him up, but instead "eschewed the word of a deeply loyal and exemplary thirty-eight year employee, for the fabricated allegations of . . . assistants" Welcome to 2019. I'm guessing he also thinks that the termination and suspension were connected. That may or may not be true. No coach thinks they deserve to get canned for job performance. Coach Gibbons is probably the victim here, but based on 2019 standards, I don't think that HC is the villian. Clearly an organized effort by the staff to oust Bill. Kept trying different angles of attack until one worked. Sad.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 13, 2019 13:30:37 GMT -5
It's also interesting that the only African American on the team is, fortunately, still on the team. I'm sure she had options had she decided Holy Cross and the basketball program had created an unwelcome environment. Does anyone else remember Raquel Scott? She was an outstanding talent right up to her injury and was, I believe, a minority.
|
|
|
Post by crusader12 on Sept 13, 2019 13:58:32 GMT -5
At the end of the day, Holy Cross has completely mismanaged what seems like dozens of issues at this point. This is an administration problem. Fr. Boroughs has destroyed the reputation of this school since becoming president and will go down as perhaps the worst in Holy Cross history. When is enough enough? Please do us all a favor Fr. B and leave Holy Cross for good. It's time for new and effective leadership that can repair the reputation you and your staff ruined.
Also if this goes to court get ready. Bill G has big support from the city of Worcester unlike Fr. B. He'd be a fool to drag this out.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 13, 2019 14:07:02 GMT -5
The "big support from the city off Worcester" is, by itself, worth nothing. What matters. is what actually happened and how those events are governed by the law. If BG was paid to the e nd f this contract, most oil this is a non-starter (unless his contract had some sort of automatic renewal built in.
As to Father Burroughs, do you know of anything he actually did that "destroyed" HC's reputation?
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Sept 13, 2019 14:32:56 GMT -5
As to claims of racism...I once had a grad student claim that her grade was a "C" because of my racist attitude toward her. I had explained she got the "C" because of my generosity since she had missed 6 of our 15 classes. and could have been given an "F" according to school attendance policy. She still said to him that she believed the grade was racist. When my chairman followed up on this Wednesday class (as he had to with such a claim) I asked him what the student's race was on Mondays. He seemed startled but he said, African-American, of course. I pointed out that she got an "A" in that class (where she had perfect attendance). I added that I was apparently not racist on Mondays, only on Wednesdays. The complaint was thrown out. It is sad that playing the race card is becoming almost automatic today. Unfortunately, the race card has always been automatically played in our society from the beginning, in daily transaction of human interaction and commerce. Please do do not forget our history and the legislation after the Civil War and Reconstruction. Jim Crow laws, Plessy v Ferguson, etc.
|
|
|
Post by ndgradbuthcfan on Sept 13, 2019 14:35:33 GMT -5
The "big support from the city off Worcester" is, by itself, worth nothing. What matters. is what actually happened and how those events are governed by the law. If BG was paid to the e nd f this contract, most oil this is a non-starter (unless his contract had some sort of automatic renewal built in. As to Father Burroughs, do you know of anything he actually did that "destroyed" HC's reputation? As a Holy Cross fan and Worcester native who lived there for many years until recently, I can attest that most of Worcester could care less about this imbroglio. And for the few who do care, I am not aware that BG is especially popular. Even if he was, as rgs318 has opined, it would make no difference in a trial. I would venture a guess that the vast majority of jurors probably never heard of BG.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Sept 13, 2019 15:06:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Sept 13, 2019 15:10:06 GMT -5
If he isn't working for the school and suspended, why would he need the company credit card, his keys, and ID?
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Sept 13, 2019 15:36:54 GMT -5
If he isn't working for the school and suspended, why would he need the company credit card, his keys, and ID? Entitlement? There's an undercurrent of grievance in this lawsuit. He was a coach at HC for 38 years, and longevity is presumably reason enough to give him a contract extension. And there is a tinge of bitterness in his age discrimination claim. To wit, the college, presumably in cahoots with his assistants, wanted him gone after last season, so that the college could hire a new (younger) coach at a significantly lower salary.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Sept 13, 2019 16:20:58 GMT -5
If he isn't working for the school and suspended, why would he need the company credit card, his keys, and ID? Entitlement? There's an undercurrent of grievance in this lawsuit. He was a coach at HC for 38 years, and longevity is presumably reason enough to give him a contract extension. And there is a tinge of bitterness in his age discrimination claim. To wit, the college, presumably in cahoots with his assistants, wanted him gone after last season, so that the college could hire a new (younger) coach at a significantly lower salary. Mad Magazine had spy vs spy. This incident has grievance vs grievance. Everyone is grieving, but thankfully no one died and everyone got paid every cent owed to them under their employment contracts. One claim in the suit I find interesting is that the phone hasn't rung with any job offers. The phone works both ways. No one is entitled to receive job offers. I wonder if the investigation report given to BG had any confidentiality clauses to it that needed to be signed before it was released to him, or since it is included in a lawsuit, it is the court releasing it as a public record not the former employee.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 13, 2019 16:27:26 GMT -5
Unfortunately, the race card has always been automatically played in our society from the beginning, in daily transaction of human interaction and commerce. Please do do not forget our history and the legislation after the Civil War and Reconstruction. Jim Crow laws, Plessy v Ferguson, etc. IMHO, neither of your points makes it acceptable to lie or to try to get benefits based on something with which the person had no direct contact. My ancestors were starved in Ireland by British policy. Does that make it acceptable for me to lie about someone who speaks English?
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Sept 13, 2019 17:08:57 GMT -5
My statement did not say that lying was acceptable in this or any other case. If a lie was stated, and perpetuate during the deposition, and sworn testimony, then that party would have perjured themselves.
I was not me that made the statement about “playing the race card becomes almost automatic today”. My reply was in response to the notation “almost automatic today”. When has it not been used throughout civilization. Playing a “card” has always been used by one group against another even before Babylonia.
Neither you nor I know if either one of the parties may have fabricated, modified or embellished the event for their advantage. We may never know since we were not involved in the day by day interaction of the parties involved.
This may very well be like the question that was asked on the internet last year. What color is that dress. One party’s perspective is different from the other. Let’s see how this is handled in the legal system, before we dig into any trenches for either side. Neither Mr. Gibbons, Ms McInerney, or Ms Parks will win, as they all will come away with professional baggage.
I am just glad that I am not part of the story.
|
|
|
Post by spenser on Sept 13, 2019 17:15:49 GMT -5
The "big support from the city off Worcester" is, by itself, worth nothing. What matters. is what actually happened and how those events are governed by the law. If BG was paid to the e nd f this contract, most oil this is a non-starter (unless his contract had some sort of automatic renewal built in. As to Father Burroughs, do you know of anything he actually did that "destroyed" HC's reputation? As a Holy Cross fan and Worcester native who lived there for many years until recently, I can attest that most of Worcester could care less about this imbroglio. And for the few who do care, I am not aware that BG is especially popular. Even if he was, as rgs318 has opined, it would make no difference in a trial. I would venture a guess that the vast majority of jurors probably never heard of BG. 100% correct.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Sept 13, 2019 17:19:25 GMT -5
Regardless of who is to blame here (Gibbons, HC, or a combination of the two) for this unfortunate situation, the fact remains that this is another black eye for Holy Cross with Fr. B as president. It’s time to for a new leader with a backbone.
|
|
|
Post by purplehaze on Sept 13, 2019 18:35:10 GMT -5
Not related to rhe merits of the case but imo the team was not playing hard for BG and when AM took over the ladies finished very strong (something that was not going to happen if he remained at the helm)
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 13, 2019 20:10:50 GMT -5
My statement did not say that lying was acceptable in this or any other case. If a lie was stated, and perpetuate during the deposition, and sworn testimony, then that party would have perjured themselves. No one claimed said that you said that. The statement was mine. What prompted my comment was other statements made in this thread. What possible connection is there between the events that took place in recent years with women's basketball at Holy Cross and reconstruction and Jim Crow legislation?
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Sept 13, 2019 22:50:26 GMT -5
I would like to have a little more insight regarding the comment of “almost automatic today”.
It seems to marginalize or being used to invalidate a possible legitimate complaint. I hope that is not your intent, that is to have a conclusion without having the evidence or having witness the day to day interaction that led up to the complaint.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Sept 13, 2019 22:52:51 GMT -5
Not related to rhe merits of the case but imo the team was not playing hard for BG and when AM took over the ladies finished very strong (something that was not going to happen if he remained at the helm) The saddest thing about this situation might be that the relationship between BG and his players seems to have eroded in his final few years, especially in light of the support he received from basketball alums during the Cooper complaint. Plus, if true, a good chunk of his staff was disloyal.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Sept 13, 2019 23:35:30 GMT -5
Not related to rhe merits of the case but imo the team was not playing hard for BG and when AM took over the ladies finished very strong (something that was not going to happen if he remained at the helm) It says I dislike this. That must have been an errant key stroke. I noted the difference in play also and was pleased to see the uptick in intensity. I go along with the party line that based on performance the college should not have renewed the contract. So, I agree with this post, I don't dislike it. I just wish the HC administration, which is made up of "men and women for others" hadn't made BG into a threat who needed two No Trespass Orders.
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Sept 13, 2019 23:42:48 GMT -5
Was the staff “disloyal” or was the Boston College game the final tipping point regarding cumulative behaviors within the team over a time period that led to the emotional and less than professional response during the game itself.
If the relationship had eroded, a reality meeting (using a familiar term of “come to Jesus”) should have occurred. When the team and or leadership dynamics is resistant to any change or modification of behavior a crisis occurs. Unfortunately it was on full public display.
Understanding that the previous year was extremely emotional for Coach Gibbons with the death of his father, and the stress of finally reaching the 600 game win achievement, it is really a shame that a recognition and intervention by a number of people close to him and the team did not occur. Thirty Four years in the same job, at the same institution is a long time. Very easy not to understand or be able to accept that interactions that were acceptable at one time are no longer acceptable today. Looking at many coaches in there behavior from the time he started in 1984, there behavior in retrospect is not viewed as acceptable today. Immediately I think of Bobby Knight.
|
|