-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Voice of the Cats Sexually Harassed Just, MSU Investigation Says
- Thread starter HookedonGriz
- Start date
- Status
If the announcer was an employee of MSU, then Title IX would apply. I don't think he was an employee of MSU, from I can tell. If the Learfield/MSU contractssays Learfield employees working on the MSU contract, are subject to MSU policies, or certain policies, then MSU would have jurisdiction to take action, perhaps or probably under Title IX. If the reporter was a student or MSU employee, then, due to the announcer working for Learfield which has a contract with MSU, then I would think MSU could and should take action under Title IX.
If MSU discriminates against a woman/person applying for admission, that would be covered by some law, and probably Title IX.
The issue, in my view, in this situation, is that it looks like neither are an employee of MSU. One works for a contractor of MSU, and is also associated with MSU, and the other covers some of MSU's athletics at times as part of her job. To me (and I am not an expert in this area), I don't see how Title IX would apply. As I have said, that doesn't mean that MSU couldn't and shouldn't determine the facts, and take some action. I would have done it quicker than MSU did.
Like CDA, I wonder if MSU has admitted that Title IX applies to the situation. What if MSU had not found for the reporter? I wonder if the reporter could have then have sued MSU under Title IX, saying by having the proceeding MSU admitted that Title IX applied.
I wonder if MSU has set precedent for allowing every Tom, Dick and Harry (and their female counterparts) to file a Title IX complaint every time something happens to them on the campus, at a game, or at a MSU function. If I go to the Cat golf outing, and some drunk guy who works for the contractor rebuilding the stadium, starts harassing me or my wife, and does it multiple times, I can't imagine that we should have the right to file a Title IX complaint with MSU.
How about this one? A Missoulian reporter is on MSU's campus walking to a football game. A construction guy working for the contractor building the new chemistry building, starts whistling and hassling the reporter. Can she file a Title IX complaint? Can she sue MSU under Title IX, knowing that this is the third time this has happened to her on MSU's campus?
Now, I do believe that she could complain to MSU, who would talk to the contractor, who would then tell his guys to knock it off. But not as a result of Title IX.
As for the non-student getting hassled in the stands at the game or tailgate, by another non-student, I just can't imagine that Title IX covers that, or that MSU would be obligated to proceed with a Title IX action.
I've just posted about 5 times more than I know on this subject. At least, a few of us find this interesting.
If MSU discriminates against a woman/person applying for admission, that would be covered by some law, and probably Title IX.
The issue, in my view, in this situation, is that it looks like neither are an employee of MSU. One works for a contractor of MSU, and is also associated with MSU, and the other covers some of MSU's athletics at times as part of her job. To me (and I am not an expert in this area), I don't see how Title IX would apply. As I have said, that doesn't mean that MSU couldn't and shouldn't determine the facts, and take some action. I would have done it quicker than MSU did.
Like CDA, I wonder if MSU has admitted that Title IX applies to the situation. What if MSU had not found for the reporter? I wonder if the reporter could have then have sued MSU under Title IX, saying by having the proceeding MSU admitted that Title IX applied.
I wonder if MSU has set precedent for allowing every Tom, Dick and Harry (and their female counterparts) to file a Title IX complaint every time something happens to them on the campus, at a game, or at a MSU function. If I go to the Cat golf outing, and some drunk guy who works for the contractor rebuilding the stadium, starts harassing me or my wife, and does it multiple times, I can't imagine that we should have the right to file a Title IX complaint with MSU.
How about this one? A Missoulian reporter is on MSU's campus walking to a football game. A construction guy working for the contractor building the new chemistry building, starts whistling and hassling the reporter. Can she file a Title IX complaint? Can she sue MSU under Title IX, knowing that this is the third time this has happened to her on MSU's campus?
Now, I do believe that she could complain to MSU, who would talk to the contractor, who would then tell his guys to knock it off. But not as a result of Title IX.
As for the non-student getting hassled in the stands at the game or tailgate, by another non-student, I just can't imagine that Title IX covers that, or that MSU would be obligated to proceed with a Title IX action.
I've just posted about 5 times more than I know on this subject. At least, a few of us find this interesting.
I wonder if someone could establish that Sanderson was effectively an employee of MSU? No question that he was on Learfield's payroll, but he was the 'Voice of the Bobcats' not the 'Voice of the Learfield's'. While not privy to the contract between MSU and Learfield, it's reasonable to expect that MSU had some say-so in terms of Learfield hiring him as announcer. Then you get into pretty small stuff, did he have an office on-campus?; a bobcat logo on his business card?; did MSU staff in any way supervise his performance?
I think what happened here is that MSU was confronted with a sexual harassment complaint, the person who investigates sexual harassment is the Title 9 guy, so they did a Title 9 investigation without a lot forethought.
I think what happened here is that MSU was confronted with a sexual harassment complaint, the person who investigates sexual harassment is the Title 9 guy, so they did a Title 9 investigation without a lot forethought.
mcg said:
All of what you mention would play into MSU taking some action, and I think they should have investigated and taken some action, but if MSU wasn't withholding from his paycheck, I assume he wasn't an employee of MSU. Some of the HR people and employment lawyers should weigh in on this.
PlayerRep said:
If I was bringing some sort of legal action against Sanderson I'd work hard to make MSU his 'effective' employer as MSU has much deeper pockets. You could argue that MSU had control over his work activities and thus was effectively his employer. I know I'm reaching here, but when you deem outsiders the 'Voice of the Bobcats' I don't think you get to easily walk away from what the voice does.
BadlandsGrizFan
Well-known member
PlayerRep said:
Found the guy who regularly assaults.
cmtgrizzly
Well-known member
mcg said:
So your lawsuit wouldnt be about justice but about how to get the most money.
BadlandsGrizFan said:
What was "found" in the post?
Are you capable of providing anything of substance, like addressing the post or answering its questions? Or, is vaguely attacking another poster the only thing you've got? I assume you will now slink away with your tail behind your legs.
Spanky2 said:
Excellent question. I think somebody should start a poll.
Question: Did the lady encourage the wicked man?
A. Yes, the whore did encourage the wicked man and his wickedness.
B. No, the man was wicked and he sinned against the lady.
C. Bobcats suck.
I choose C.
It's at this point in the thread that I'd like to reiterate that I believe what Sanderson did was very wrong, that I do not believe Ms. Just did anything wrong, that I feel for her for having to go through what she did, and that I hope her speaking out stops something similar from happening in the future.
I just thought the Title IX implication was interesting given the respective statuses of those involved. Sorry if that took away from the above.
I just thought the Title IX implication was interesting given the respective statuses of those involved. Sorry if that took away from the above.
Interesting discussion.
BadlandsGrizFan
Well-known member
SACCAT66 said:
Tongue in mouth.
- Status