Currie is not fired yet

#51
#51
I seriously don't know why all of you get so caught up in this. The BOT will determine this - not us fans. And honestly we will never know more than they want us to know. And we have absolutely no influence on the decision at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#53
#53
I know they are investigating firing for cause but if you let him run around now he can sabatoge the search. He already called his National media buddies right after the news broke. You keep him on payroll you are keeping him on a leash. He’s not going anything further to jeopardize his buyout. Smart move by not firing in him yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#54
#54
volfan102455 said:
I seriously don't know why all of you get so caught up in this. The BOT will determine this - not us fans. And honestly we will never know more than they want us to know. And we have absolutely no influence on the decision at all.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth over the cost. I happen to think it won't be so bad.

I wouldn't mention it myself but others are being really negative about the impact to the University. It's fair to counter.
 
#55
#55
orangesicle said:
So now UT has a back-stabbing SOB who hasn't a clue on how to run an athletic dept.
Click to expand...

Another recent account spewing out some negative ****.

Fulmer was our best coach since Neyland, second greatest ever. He'll do just fine.

Orangesicle is an odd choice of name for a Vol. It's often used as an insult by some of our opponents, particularly those in the domain of Satan.

Curious....
 
#56
#56
BanditVol said:
I'm aware he's done, just thought the firing was official.

Where are you getting $5.4 M for the buyout? He only made 900K a year for four years, or so I read.

As for the report elsewhere in this thread that Schiano and Currie together could cost $10-15M, someone is writing some really good fiction.

The total cost will be a tenth of that, at most, and could well be zero. An MOU signed by only an AD is not even close to a contract, and what did the MOU say anyway? Did it spell out terms? Did it mention amounts? Did it cover the buyout terms? I certainly don't know, but those details matter.

As for Currie, whether they can fire him with cause depends on what is in his contract and how it's written. Regardless, they are almost certainly going to give him something anyway. My guess is 500K.
Click to expand...

His buyout is $100k per month for 54 months. That’s $5.4mm total. The only way it’s reduced is if it’s somehow negotiated down or he’s fired with cause and we owe him nothing.
 
#57
#57
peytonmanningwoo said:
Ummm...any proof or just wild speculation? Consensus opinion in the media is that those two clusters will cost us around 10 to 15 million.
Click to expand...

BS.. We will owe Currie nothing. He will be fired with cause. Will pay Shamoo very little if anything. It will NOT be in his best interest to sue..
 
#58
#58
BeardedVol said:
The Tennessee Open Records Act disagrees with you.
Click to expand...

There are lots of exceptions to protect individuals in those 34 pages. Then there are the laws related to what information an employer can share regarding their employees (current and former).

I'm sure you wouldn't mind if your boss published your performance evaluations on social media for the world to see?
 
#59
#59
m1al said:
BS.. We will owe Currie nothing. He will be fired with cause. Will pay Shamoo very little if anything. It will NOT be in his best interest to sue..
Click to expand...

You are assuming there is a valid reason. I suspect either they will pay Currie or strike a deal with him to avoid a law suit.
 
#60
#60
volfan102455 said:
There are lots of exceptions to protect individuals in those 34 pages. Then there are the laws related to what information an employer can share regarding their employees (current and former).

I'm sure you wouldn't mind if your boss published your performance evaluations on social media for the world to see?
Click to expand...

And it will be very hard to argue against the FOI requests, given the public-facing nature of the athletic director position,the very public way in which h was terminated, and the amount of university funds involved in the transaction.
 
#63
#63
Is Fulmer really going to use Currie as a gopher to go get coffee and donuts?:popcorn:
 
#65
#65
Currie opted to utilize the private aircraft of a Kansas State booster to continue trying to find Butch Jones’ replacement. so maybe he's still working for K-State
 
#67
#67
Work Currie's as* off while he's still employed, donuts, coffee, mo Tea, take out the trash and yes scrub them floors Johnny boy:eek:lol:
 
#69
#69
m1al said:
Would insubordination be a valid reason?
Click to expand...

I don't believe one instance of insubordination is a valid reason. Most employers would have to write up an employee multiple times to show a pattern or it would have to be severe. In the press conference Davenport said she had given Currie full control of the search. That will be a factor in this IMO.
 
#70
#70
BeardedVol said:
And it will be very hard to argue against the FOI requests, given the public-facing nature of the athletic director position,the very public way in which h was terminated, and the amount of university funds involved in the transaction.
Click to expand...

The privacy laws still override some requests and prevent certain information from being communicated to the public for a certain number years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#71
#71
BeardedVol said:
Insubordination, misuse of university resources and funds, and disparaging the image and reputation of the university if I had to guess.
Click to expand...

They will have to separate the damage done by the fans (via Social Media) to the university's reputation from what some of you may perceive to be due to Currie.

Currie was not the one that drug GS's name through the mud. Currie was not the one that painted the rock.

Currie was not the one generating the craziness in the fans. Currie was not the one disrupting the basketball game.

He may be guilty of selecting a coach that the fans didn't approve of - but that is not grounds for firing with cause.
 
#72
#72
volfan102455 said:
I don't believe one instance of insubordination is a valid reason. Most employers would have to write up an employee multiple times to show a pattern or it would have to be severe. In the press conference Davenport said she had given Currie full control of the search. That will be a factor in this IMO.
Click to expand...

But the fact that order was rescinded, and another given means it can actually be for insubordination.

If I tell you to serve a customer anything he wants, that's okay. But I can later come back and tell you to cut that customer off. If you continue to serve that person, I can fire you.

I can countermand my own previous order.
 
#73
#73
TN_Transplant said:
But the fact that order was rescinded, and another given means it can actually be for insubordination.

If I tell you to serve a customer anything he wants, that's okay. But I can later come back and tell you to cut that customer off. If you continue to serve that person, I can fire you.

I can countermand my own previous order.
Click to expand...

What I am saying is that if that is the reason, they are on thin ice if it was just once. Employers generally can't fire someone for one mistake unless it is illegal in nature.

There are both state and federal laws that protect employees from just being fired (without pay) because their boss doesn't like them.
 
#74
#74
Also, the rules for "at will" employees are somewhat different than the rules for "contracted" employees who have a guaranteed term of employee (e.g. with a buyout).

He had a contract. The contract probably had terms included. UT would have have to prove that he did something that makes the contract void.

Regardless we all are speculating based on what we hear from media folks who probably only have part of the story.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top