Post by Tom on Sept 13, 2019 9:42:31 GMT -5
The sum and substance of Gibbons' complaint is this:
During a meeting with Mr. Hoag in January, in response to a question posed by Mr. Gibbons about the investigative procedure, he was told that he would have a chance to review the investigative report and discuss it with Mr. Achenbach, who would be making the final decision, the suit states.
Mr. Gibbons alleges he did not receive the investigative report and there was no discussion with Mr. Achenbach before his being suspended for 60 days on Jan. 31.
"This sequence of events was compl etely in violation of the appeal procedure” outlined in his employment agreement, according to Mr. Gibbons.
Mr. Gibbons alleges he did not receive the investigative report and there was no discussion with Mr. Achenbach before his being suspended for 60 days on Jan. 31.
"This sequence of events was compl etely in violation of the appeal procedure” outlined in his employment agreement, according to Mr. Gibbons.
If true, this could be in violation of the college's policies and procedures.
The investigator will next meet privately with the alleged offender. The alleged offender will be informed of the allegations and will have the opportunity to respond to them, including submitting a written statement if he or she so desires. The alleged offender may also submit the name(s) of any witness(es). If the alleged offender refuses to participate in the investigation, the College will base its decision on the other information gathered during the investigation and the inferences drawn from that evidence and the alleged offender’s unwillingness to cooperate in the investigation. Possible disciplinary action, including termination, could result from the refusal to cooperate in an investigation. Each party will have an opportunity to respond to the other party’s statement of events. Any witnesses that the investigator decides should be contacted will be interviewed privately. Neither the individual making the complaint nor the alleged offender will be present at witness interviews.
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.