Sarkisian takes leave of absence at USC UPDATED: Sark fired by USC

[Sparlimb]

If they want to continue their trend of questionable coaching hires) they could go after Bert.

 

[station19]

So when do we start to hear the 'Jerry Kill to USC' rumors?

As soon as Tubby starts them.

 

[mplsbadger]

This will bring Pat Haden's judgment into question. Lane Kiffin, Sark, this is not a good look.

Haden didn't hire Kiffen, Mike Garrett did.

 

[Seany]

So when do we start to hear the 'Jerry Kill to USC' rumors?

Hahaha.

It's pretty hilarious even trying to picture Jerry coaching at SC amidst all that glitz and glamour, and there's old Jerry, about as down home and homespun as it gets, and about as glitzy as a dusty old Pinto.

 

[gopher7]

Sarkisian suing USC for $30 million for being fired because of his disability.

http://www.tmz.com/2015/12/07/steve-sarkisian-sues-usc/

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

Sarkisian suing USC for $30 million for being fired because of his disability.

http://www.tmz.com/2015/12/07/steve-sarkisian-sues-usc/

1. The fact that alcoholism is a disability under California law is absurd.
2. Sarkisian continues to make himself look like a bigger and bigger idiot.

 

[Ski U Mah 55]

1. The fact that alcoholism is a disability under California law is absurd.
2. Sarkisian continues to make himself look like a bigger and bigger idiot.

If he and his attorneys think they can win of course they will (and should) sue for the contract money. Anyone would do the same in that situation.

 

[Sparlimb]

If he and his attorneys think they can win of course they will (and should) sue for the contract money. Anyone would do the same in that situation.

Right. And USC will argue they fired him for cause due to inebriation during job duties. Being an alcoholic is one thing, showing up to work drunk is another. You can get fired for the latter under any state law.

 

[dpodoll68]

Right. And USC will argue they fired him for cause due to inebriation during job duties. Being an alcoholic is one thing, showing up to work drunk is another. You can get fired for the latter under any state law.

If you accept the premise that alcoholism is a disease, then how can you fire someone for their disease being manifested at work? Could the Gophers fire Jerry Kill because he had a seizure on the sidelines?

 

[bemidjigopher]

At the end of the day Sark chose to show up to work drunk. He chose to keep alcohol in the lockeroom. Self inflicted "diseases" are the fault of the inflictor. Sark can get clean that's up to him, Kill will have to manage his epilepsy for the rest of his life, that's not a choice.

 

[beavergopher]

1. The fact that alcoholism is a disability under California law is absurd.
2. Sarkisian continues to make himself look like a bigger and bigger idiot.

Yes and yes. Uncle Mike was disabled? Who knew.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

If you accept the premise that alcoholism is a disease, then how can you fire someone for their disease being manifested at work? Could the Gophers fire Jerry Kill because he had a seizure on the sidelines?

Companies can terminate employees because of their disability if their disability causes them an "undue hardship". It's really a balancing test between whether the employers have given "reasonable" accommodations and whether their is an undue hardship because of the disability.

If it's impossible to do your job, the employer does not have to keep you employed just because of the ADA. But it's scary for employers.

This case isn't much different from the MN State Lottery worker who is suing the state for the exact same reason.

 

[CWCWCW]

Did the coach admit to being drunk on the job? I don't remember that. He had an alibi of some drug reaction from what I recall.
As far as alcohol is concerned in the locker room, that may not be wise, but is it against his contract?
Unless there is hard proof, I'd expect a Coach victory.
Maybe John Edwards can take the case.

 

[Donovan]

Steve Sar

(meant Steve Sarkisian in the title)
I'm assuming he is going to get hired by someone, but I wonder if his lawsuit is going to hurt his prospects. This story can't help: http://www.tmz.com/2015/12/09/steve-sarkisian-usc-football-betrayal/

 

[50PoundHead]

Did the coach admit to being drunk on the job? I don't remember that. He had an alibi of some drug reaction from what I recall.
As far as alcohol is concerned in the locker room, that may not be wise, but is it against his contract?
Unless there is hard proof, I'd expect a Coach victory.
Maybe John Edwards can take the case.

Probably a violation of school policy.

 

[Seany]

His players are right. He let them down initially with his grossly irresponsible behavior, and now he's let them down further by leveling this ridiculous lawsuit. I really wish the guy would just take some personal responsibility for his actions and the choices he made as opposed to embracing some nominal 'victimhood' status simply because state law allows him to do so. Hey, you have a problem, then do something about it. Get some help, take care of it, make your amends, and move on with your life. I see no reason why he couldn't have a continued career in coaching were he to pursue that path of growth and honest self-realization, but this, this just reeks of merely seeking a payday because a highly questionable law allows one to do so, while at the same time absolving one of any personal accountability at all.

Look, I have known functional alcoholics in my lifetime, people whom are able to maintain jobs and careers while performing their duties quite well in spite of their drinking issues, and these people consciously choose to not drink on the job because they know and accept the fact they'd be fired with cause if they were found to be doing so. But Sarkisian chose to drink on that job, he made that choice, and to think that his employer may have to pay him millions because of that...wow. Like Yakov Smirnov said, "USA, what a country!"

To me this would certainly preclude Sarkisian from coaching again, because at any level below that of the NFL, football coaches also carry the inherent responsibility of being a mentor and role model for young men, and what the hell kind of role model can Sarkisian be? "Hey, I'm a drunk whom evaded accountability will getting others to pay and pay and pay for my piss-poor choices". Not quite the lesson any young person needs to learn, and how could one possibly teach young people about the virtues of character, when apparently completely lacking in it oneself?

 

[disco]

Well, if Bobby Petrino can get hired again, someone will hire Sark.

That said, much of the reason for alcoholism being classified as it is, is to encourage and enable people to get help without repercussion, and that's a good thing. At least where I've worked, the employer wants the employee to be able to go to treatment and get well and be able to return to work. (there are exceptions, where safety is involved, like say a forklift driver being drunk and injuring someone, or where a serious criminal act takes place while on company business). Had Sark gone to the school and said "I need to go to rehab," the likelihood would be that USC would have supported him. But he didn't. He lied about it, and continued to get loaded on the job. Granted, we don't know what was said between him and his superiors, but if they offered him the choice to go to rehab, and he turned it down, then I don't see where USC had a choice.

 

[GopherHomer]

Sort of tangentially relevant to this thread - I just saw that USC is considering trying to hire Dave Aranda as their DC. This would be very good news for civilized society (sorry if this was posted elsewhere...I didn't see it).