Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

NEW: Regents Meeting, Benson Decision, Investigation Report -- Monday, 6/12

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sure hope CU fans don't let RG and MM pick up a tab at the local restaurants any time soon.
 
leftybuff said:
So the AD is now a law enforcement adjunct....only at CU.

So an AC gets tipsy at the team BBQ and drives away, call the cops?

I guess I am glad for the letter of reprimand, and RG and MikMac take a $100,000 hit. So it could have been worse. I cannot imagine working under that kind of micromanagement...I bet I am not the only one.

How Phil weaseled out with just a 10-day suspension and reprimand astounds.

RG and MikMac reported up the chain, and they get the monetary penalty...I guess the lesson here is admin. and faculty get treated differently than AD employees.

CU gonna CU. It could have been worse. So did they approve the extension, or is the waiting game still going?
Click to expand...
Extension will be approved, Should be by the end of the week.
 
onealcd said:
What crawled up football scoops ass?
Click to expand...
F u for making me read that.

Somehow we get this:



Followed by this:



And yet CSU fans and national writers are still criticizing the conclusions.
mindblown.png
 
So all the angst over "promoting" Tumpkin amounts to nothing. And the chicken littles around here seemed to think that was a big deal.

It took six freaking months to come to this conclusion?

We are our own worst enemy. God help the rest of college football if we ever manage to get out of our own way.
 
Seems like the Denver press should hereafter pepper their news filings with a liberal dose of "unlike Baylor" in their reporting.
 
BehindEnemyLines said:
Donations are tax deductible.
Click to expand...
^ This.
Also, I think that everything said and done was completely appropriate, with the MAJOR exception of a 10 day suspension and reprimand for Phil. Phil has completely outlived his time at CU- he has overseen and driven ousters of CU employees for less than this. Unbelievable.
 
dio said:
It annoys me - but I think it does give some level of impartiality and credence to the findings.
Click to expand...

I think once the regents let this get out of hand, Benson called up one of his respected colleagues and knew it would be a better way to allow the process to move. It also would help get the process respectability and credibility. I think this is where Benson, his connections and his leadership behind the scenes was tremendously helpful.
 
Buffalo Brad said:
I think once the regents let this get out of hand, Benson called up one of his respected colleagues and knew it would be a better way to allow the process to move. It also would help get the process respectability and credibility. I think this is where Benson, his connections and his leadership behind the scenes was tremendously helpful.
Click to expand...
I'll buy that
 
All CU contracts are recommended to have provisions to make the employee "...report allegations of sexual misconduct,
including domestic and dating violence, to those personnel and offices responsible for investigating such allegations."

Talk about assuming a previously non-existent duty guaranteed to open the University to future lawsuits, I shake my head. Did the Regents adopt the report in its entirety? This one recommendation alone is mind-numbingly foolish.
 
leftybuff said:
All CU contracts are recommended to have provisions to make the employee "...report allegations of sexual misconduct,
including domestic and dating violence, to those personnel and offices responsible for investigating such allegations."

Talk about assuming a previously non-existent duty guaranteed to open the University to future lawsuits, I shake my head. Did the Regents adopt the report in its entirety? This one recommendation alone is mind-numbingly foolish.
Click to expand...

Compaines require their employees to complete training and certifications like this all the time. Not doing so opens them up to future lawsuits. In the ones I've done over the years its always said you have a duty to report these type of things. Unless I'm misunderstanding the recommendation or your stance on this, I don't know that this is any different.
 
The ethical violation in the report stings. As does the decision to let Tumpkin coach in light of what and when they knew about the abuse.

Salazar was a good leader and appears to have mitigated and negotiated damage. The report, on the other hand, is pretty tart in some sections.

Will create lingering buzz in my opinion.
 
Well we knew that the whole thing would be handled poorly. Given CU's ability to really cock things up I'm actually pretty happy with this
 
Scotch said:
Compaines require their employees to complete training and certifications like this all the time. Not doing so opens them up to future lawsuits. In the ones I've done over the years its always said you have a duty to report these type of things. Unless I'm misunderstanding the recommendation or your stance on this, I don't know that this is any different.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you can clarify for me.

As Joe Citizen, I have no obligation to report a crime. There are situations, particularly those pertaining to sexual assault, where a duty to report is imposed (i.e. physicians, nurses, schoolteachers and probably ones I do not know), but those are imposed by law.

However, if a duty is imposed by a contract of employment, how is the employee now not an agent of law enforcement? It would seem a duty is being assumed that did not otherwise exist. Thus, an employee's failure to report sexual misconduct, including domestic and dating violence, now opens the employer to potential liability that did not exist until the duty was assumed. Failure to report opens the door to a failure of the employer to properly train, among other things, and I can imagine one could come up with another half dozen ways to attach liability to the employer.

Now CU has to train its employees, assuming this recommendation is adopted and contracts amended, to spot, for instance, dating violence, and discriminate that from garden variety violence. What are they gong to do, have a date registry? I know it sounds silly, but this is why I do not understand the thinking behind making employers, clubs, and other non-governmental entities mini-law enforcement agencies. It seems redundant and fraught with problems, self-imposed civil liability among them.

It has been a while since I was employed by a large entity, so maybe this really is the new normal. I can understand training employees to spot fraud, theft, signs of domestic abuse, avoid liability for gender, sexual, age discrimination etc. But impose on them an obligation to spot, diagnose and report crime? Seems like you are asking for lawsuits.
 
My opinion of the report. Clears macs name more than I thought it would, shows RG in a bad light, and PD should have been fired over this since he essentially let everyone down.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top