Bingo. I would hate to be in that position.

Is your stance that the legal system's decision should supersede an employer's right to do what they feel is best for their business?

I can tell you with complete confidence that given what I know about Zach Smith's behavior over the years, I would not feel comfortable employing him and would not want him representing my company. What the legal system decides is only tangentially related to my company, and the factors that would lead me to firing him matter regardless of what the legal system determines.

They don't differ as much as you think they do, particularly for private companies. The fact that an employee was twice accused of domestic abuse and the burden that places on the company is more than enough justification to let go of an employee in an at-will state.

As an employer, you "can" do whatever you want (although you are certainly subject to possible legal action based upon what you do). That doesn't mean you "should".

It doesn't smell right in any way that employees should be fired due to merely accusations. You could be accused of a crime before you leave work today. Anyone could.

Maybe I'm old school, but the legal system has to mean something. Nowadays, it seems the court of public opinion (and the media) matters more than what is decided in front of a judge or jury.

Employers have the right to investigate accusations, form an opinion on how those accusations are impacting their organization, and make a decision as to what's best for their organization based on that. You may not think they should. I think that's hopelessly naive and assumes that most accusations are false. I think your opinion of where you believe society is now has clouded your judgment on the matter, and that were organizations to proceed the way you're suggesting, victims would suffer even more than they currently do.

You're acting as if I'm suggesting everybody be fired as soon as an accusation's made. That's not at all what I suggested my course of action would be, nor is it representative of the Zach Smith case.

(Also a vaguely related aside -- can't help but mention that currently the most prominent legal investigation in the world -- perhaps the most prominent legal investigation in history -- includes a side insisting that the US legal system is so hopelessly biased and corrupt that they are conspiring to take down the President, who is completely innocent. That some of those same people now insist on the sanctity of the legal system just in case Zach Smith isn't a scumbag is. . .something.)

Yeah because Stoops' has an excellent history of handling domestic violence. (See: Joe Mixon)

First thing I agree with though.

I totally forgot about the Mixon incident. I was thinking more on an Xs and Os basis, and the HC profile that would be acceptable in Columbus, and who's available.

I don't have a copy of the employee handbook for the state of Ohio handy. But I'd be pretty shocked if there wasn't all sorts of language in there requiring employees to report accusations of abusive behavior to superiors.

If Urban Meyer knew of the 2015 incident he almost certainly had a requirement to report that through appropriate channels. That's what Ohio State is investigating now.

It is not even remotely controversial and ay half-formed employer would do the same. Comparing that to a lynch mob is hilarious in its wrongheadedness.

And yes -- if an employee of mine was twice accused of domestic abuse and I kept that hidden, I would deserve the criticism I received and my company's board would remove me almost instantly.

That's fair -- and I 100% agree on criminal justice reform. I totally get the PR impact of the whole deep state thing and can't fault Trump for fighting the battle in the Media. I get it. It's just increasingly obvious that narrative doesn't fit and I find it funny how the party of law and order has made this about face on the CIA and FBI, that's all.

It's funny also to me how liberals have done the same about face. The CIA and FBI used to be "the man". Now they can do no wrong. Just goes to show how quickly we will change opinions to fit political biases.

As is usually the case, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I have a strong distrust of those big institutions - but I'm sure the majority of employees there at least try to do the right thing.

The polling on opinions of the FBI actually doesn't indicate an about face on the left. Just prior to Trump taking office, 65% of self-identified Republicans viewed the FBI favorably. That number's dropped to 49%.

Amongst Democrats, the number has stayed stable at 76% over the same period.

A couple of points for clarity as posts are starting to hijack reality to fit arguments.

Reality #1 - Meyer has not been fired (yet) - he has been placed on leave, pending investigation.

Reality #2 - all of the companies can't / shouldn't allow allegations...." "What is Urban suppose to do..." are answered clearly by the OSU policy handbook:

Ohio State's Sexual Misconduct policy, under the auspices of Title IX, requires all university employees to report what they know. Under domestic abuse, Ohio State's threshold is not whether a person has been charged. It reads in part, "An individual need not be charged with or convicted of a criminal offense to be found responsible for domestic violence pursuant to this policy."

That policy applies to "Ohio State faculty, staff, students, student employees, graduate associates, appointees, volunteers, vendors, and visitors."

Under frequently asked questions, the Ohio State policy also makes clear that leaders in the are required to do.

"Anyone who supervises faculty, staff, students, and volunteers; chairs/directors; and all faculty members have an additional obligation to report known or suspected incidents of sexual misconduct. Because of their positions of authority, these individuals have always had a heightened responsibility to report all other incidents of sexual misconduct."

Additionally, Reality #3 - Meyers new contract states:

Paragraph 4.1 (e) of Meyer's extension reads:

"Coach shall promptly report to Ohio State's Title IX Athletics any known violations of Ohio State's Sexual Misconduct Policy (including, but not limited to, sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual exploitation, intimate violence and stalking) that involve any student, faculty or staff or that is in connection with a university sponsored activity or event. ... For purposes of this Section 4.1 (e), a "known violation" shall mean a violation or allegation of a violation of Title IX that Coach is aware of or has reasonable cause is taking place or may have taken place."


So if your company had a policy that stated you are responsible to inform the company of any allegations and you did not inform them of allegations that you were aware (and then if the company came to you later and asked "what did you know" and you say "nothing"). Then yes, indeed, your ass very well would be fired. But first, it is a good bet you would be placed on leave while your superiors investigated....just as is taking place with Meyer (and his wife who will certainly be fired) - per OSU policy that they disregarded.

Just to throw more gas on the fire....

https://www.projectveritas.com/2018/08/02/an-unfair-game-... /