Bearister, please remove this post to the women's basketball forum!bearister said:DiabloWags said:wifeisafurd said:
Oh your back from your safe place.Quote:
thanks for the PM, Stunned and amazed is all I can say. Heads should roll.
The fact that you've gone from "heads should roll" to "what about due process for McKeever" because of what happened with the Cal soccer coach pretty much says it all. It's simply amazing how much you cherry pick someone's post in order to stroke your gigantic ego.
You strike me as someone that is nothing but a pompous "blowhard" that can never admit when theyre wrong.
Or were you not the guy who initially posted . . . heads should roll?
Just stop.
You're embarrassing yourself about a Cal program that you know NOTHING about.
You continue to criticize others here for assuming that they've done nothing more than believe a newspaper article with your fool's errand assumptions. There are some posters on Bearinsider that have big egos and conduct themselves in a most pompous fashion, but you really take the cake.
You might want to apply for a job with Cal HR.
They'd love someone like you.
You're now on Ignore.
You guys are scaring me. I thought I lived in a universe where you teamed up to kick me in the nuts every Sunday when I post a Robert Reich op ed. You can't change your positions on the sun dial like that. I'm an elderly feeble pensioner that can't bear up under that strain.
OT: Teri McKeever
82,330 Views |
529 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by movielover
I requested that but I've been advised that only the Tech Talk forum will take it.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
bearister said:
You guys are scaring me. I thought I lived in a universe where you teamed up to kick me in the nuts every Sunday when I post a Robert Reich op ed. You can't change your positions on the sun dial like that. I'm an elderly feeble pensioner that can't bear up under that strain.
When that pompous neighbor of yours from down the street shows up at your XMAS PARTY 30 years after the Lou Campanelli "investigation" bragging about being able to name "names" ....
Hahahahaha!!!
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
UC Davis recently had an investigation regarding alleged hazing of some baseball players. The same four to six month timeframe was announced. Davis Enterprise writer Bob Dunning (an Oregon law school grad) wrote on the topic, and the consequences of such a long process.
Retired attorney Lawrence Booher replied to his column on Facebook:
"Before retirement, I was a labor lawyer for a large company. From time to time we conducted internal investigations of serious matters ... I cannot recall any case that took more than two weeks to resolve - including my review which often lead to additional interviews or documentation. (Note - in cases of potential termination for incompetence, the process was much more lengthy ... ) In most cases, the majority of the work was done in less than a week. One or two people (two is better) conduct interviews of the complainants, those complained against, and possible witnesses. Relevant documentation is copied. My review. Presentation of the findings to management including recommended action. It is not a time consuming process, even if there are several claimed victims, accused, and witnesses. Most HR professionals have carried out investigations many times and know how to do it. On reflection, I cannot conceive what could delay completion of an investigation for four months. Suggestion - make an inquiry in a few weeks and ask how many interviews have already been conducted. If the answer is several, ask what more interviews are needed and what is the delay? If the answer is few, suggest more experienced investigators should be brought in. Good column."
- lots of witnesses, but only one alleged perpetrator.
Reasons for a longer investigation:
- possible termination in play for three or more individuals
- private industry speed vs government
- motivation of the outside firm to rack up higher fees
Retired attorney Lawrence Booher replied to his column on Facebook:
"Before retirement, I was a labor lawyer for a large company. From time to time we conducted internal investigations of serious matters ... I cannot recall any case that took more than two weeks to resolve - including my review which often lead to additional interviews or documentation. (Note - in cases of potential termination for incompetence, the process was much more lengthy ... ) In most cases, the majority of the work was done in less than a week. One or two people (two is better) conduct interviews of the complainants, those complained against, and possible witnesses. Relevant documentation is copied. My review. Presentation of the findings to management including recommended action. It is not a time consuming process, even if there are several claimed victims, accused, and witnesses. Most HR professionals have carried out investigations many times and know how to do it. On reflection, I cannot conceive what could delay completion of an investigation for four months. Suggestion - make an inquiry in a few weeks and ask how many interviews have already been conducted. If the answer is several, ask what more interviews are needed and what is the delay? If the answer is few, suggest more experienced investigators should be brought in. Good column."
- lots of witnesses, but only one alleged perpetrator.
Reasons for a longer investigation:
- possible termination in play for three or more individuals
- private industry speed vs government
- motivation of the outside firm to rack up higher fees
Latest report from Scott Reid linked below. Knowlton finally released the type of statement that should have been released the day McKeever was put on administrative leave. Total incompetence. Beyond that, mostly a clickbait regurgitation of prior articles.
There is one thing that is making me very suspicious. We keep reading articles claiming that McKeever used a "racial epithet" which has now morphed into the plural of "epithets". I find it incredible that we have literally no description (let alone quotation) of what was said when it seems very clear that the reporter, swimmers and/or parents would know.
The reporter has given literally no context other than it was in connection with rap music. Instead, "racial epithet" is being thrown around with the predictable incendiary reaction from readers and many on this board. Everyone should be very suspicious of the reporters motives in that regard. In fact, (i) if the reporter doesn't know the specifics yet he's making that type of claim, he's a hack; and (ii) if he does know the specifics but is not providing details, he's a hack. So he's a hack.
https://www.ocregister.com/2022/06/03/mckeever-investigation-uc-berkeley-ad-tells-parents-he-shares-their-concerns/
There is one thing that is making me very suspicious. We keep reading articles claiming that McKeever used a "racial epithet" which has now morphed into the plural of "epithets". I find it incredible that we have literally no description (let alone quotation) of what was said when it seems very clear that the reporter, swimmers and/or parents would know.
The reporter has given literally no context other than it was in connection with rap music. Instead, "racial epithet" is being thrown around with the predictable incendiary reaction from readers and many on this board. Everyone should be very suspicious of the reporters motives in that regard. In fact, (i) if the reporter doesn't know the specifics yet he's making that type of claim, he's a hack; and (ii) if he does know the specifics but is not providing details, he's a hack. So he's a hack.
https://www.ocregister.com/2022/06/03/mckeever-investigation-uc-berkeley-ad-tells-parents-he-shares-their-concerns/
We must've crossed paths at some point. I believe Carlos graduated in 78 or 79. I graduated in 80 and loved watching Pete Cutino roam the deck while leading our team to victory. I was also friendly with a few members of the men's and women's swim teams who were in Unit 1 with me freshman year. It all feels so quaint in retrospect. I was blessed to have attended Joe Roth's final game my freshman year as well as watch Gene The Dream Ransom RIP play spirited ball in Harmon Gym. I also ran into Carlos at UCLA for the NCAA or MPSF tourney (can't remember which) and asked him why his girls chose the Farm. He politely said it was the best place for them but also said Maggie was ready to go to Cal but couldn't pull the trigger presumably because of the coach. I think if we'd landed his daughters we'd have an ongoing dynasty. Like you, I sincerely hope this gets resolved quickly and the program can move forward quickly.DiabloWags said:juarezbear said:DiabloWags said:juarezbear said:
I hope Knowlton and the big swim donors are putting together a list of potential coaches as we type. It would be typiCAL to see our AD wait and around and start from scratch when the report comes in rather than be nimble and ahead of the game. I am an ex Cal athlete and have great love for the school and our athletic teams. I have a particular pride in all of our aquatic sports which have all achieved great success in the pool and the classroom. Frankly, aquatics have been our best consistently performing sports for decades. Our women's water polo team had a bad coach for a long time and suffered as a result. We even missed out on Maggie Steffins because of him. Simmons has the team on an upswing but it's been an uphill battle. Bottom line is I hope and pray the women's swim team can bounce back quickly and reassume its position as a marquee program.
Thank you for your heartfelt post as a Cal Bear and former Cal athlete.
Yes, we got Charlie but we missed out on Maggie because of a bad coach.
I often thought that she was MJ and Maureen O'Toole's daughter Kelly Mendoza was Pippin at Monte Vista.
As you probably know, Mendoza started off at Cal and scored 27 goals as a freshman, but transferred to 'SC.
I was actually a freshman when Carlos was a senior, but I lived in the same dorm as Pete Cutino, Jr, and his roomie Alan Miller when I was a sophomore. About a dozen years later I ran into Peter on a 747 one night coming back from NYC and heading to California. He was living over in Spain and working as an architect.
I'm with you 100%.
wifeisafurd said:With some help from the Onion:Unit2Sucks said:Yes, if they were actually trying to investigate, someone like that would be fine.DiabloWags said:Unit2Sucks said:
If I were a donor to Cal sports I would be extremely frustrated with wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars on a high priced law firm like Munger conducting a pointless investigation. This easily could have been done internally or with a more cost effective investigation. These big expensive law firms are incredibly poor value for something like this. Could easily end up in the 7 figures and take more than a year.
I know of a guy that is retired from law enforcement and he worked for UC Berkeley's HR Dept., conducting investigations regarding complaints of harassment.
He would interview the various parties in question, do a 30 page write-up of a report that included direct quotes, and then an Administrator official that he reported to would read his report and say, "Do you really want to put that in there?"
The purpose of using a big name law firm is to insulate the university and administrators by relying on the unimpeachable expertise of the name brand they are forking the cash over to. No disrespect to the very fine lawyers who will no doubt be involved, but you don't need the keenest legal minds in the country to interview people and ask them what happened. Big law firms love doing these investigations because it's impossible for them to lose. Dan Snyder hired Gibson Dunn recently to "investigate" their sexual harassment. I've worked at firms that have done these investigations and let's just say it's a popular assignment.
In an abrupt change in position, Cal Chancellor Carol Christ announced in a Berkeley press conference today, that she is ending an independent investigation by an international law film into allegations against women's swim coach, Terry McKeever. These broad ranging accusations were reported in a newspaper article by reporter Scott Reid.
Christ indicated while all the accusations matter, she wanted a new type of coach for student-athletes attending Cal. She indicated that Cal was full of traditional grim, determined, and emotionally unavailable coaches, who often motivated their players through criticism, discipline and other forms of conduct that were no longer acceptable. "We need to adjust to the times," Christ indicated.
At this point, Christ introduced the new head women's swimming coach, Chloe Emma Goodwill, the mother of one of the swimmers accusing McKeever of misconduct. Goodwill promised the swimmers a new type of program with genuine humility and heartfelt remorse at past behavior. Goodwill noted: "we need to in incorporate safe spaces and trigger warnings, as well as a bias-response hotline for all player parents that reaches the very top of the Cal organization chart. After all, these parents are the ones who obsessed with getting their kids into increasingly competitive four-year colleges, refused to let their kids play outside by themselves, overscheduled them, and generally shielded them from the adversities of daily life that once forced young people to develop resilience and strength against adversity." Goodwill continued "that in the future all athletes will be treated the same, even if that means holding certain athletes back. By recruiting hundreds of high-profile athletes with natural speed, strength, and agility, Cal coaches were in a position to play favorites, at the expense of other players. That kind of behavior is now unacceptable. And competition- forget about it - every one of our dear little girls now gets a participation prize."
Christ returned to the podium to announce that coaches will no longer be allowed to raise their voices, curse, show anger or otherwise adversely the impact the culture of safety for Cal's psychologically fragile student-athletes. As such, Christ announced that Justin Wilcox and his entire coach staff had been terminated, as well as coaches Jack Clark, and Kirk Everist, and that Cal will be reevaluating the coaches of any other programs that had success in recent seasons. Christ added: "We, of course, will not examine our basketball programs, as it is clear from their records that there is no player discipline."
Christ indicated that the football program had been particularly egregious. Linemen were being bodied shamed by being told to get into shape and lose fat, suffering irreversible psychological trauma. "Any new coaches will never use the trigger words "shape" or "fat" again, that clearly are meant as microaggressions against sensitive large men," Christ announced. Moreover, "no coach will ever refer to our beloved rival across the Bay while using a word associated with a sexual act in the same sentence. That is just too much hate for our precious student-athletes to handle" said Christ. "That kind of language has no place in college football - except maybe on the field. And the locker rooms. And screamed from the stands. Coach Wilcox and his staff may have been modern coaches for explaining to players specifically why they was screaming at them, but we need to have pacificist, neutered coaches for our time. Finally, our great Cal neuroscientists, based on concepts they viewed on television, have developed a process so that the memories of football players and those in other violent sports, will be surgically divided between their sports careers and personal lives, so they will not have the relive the horror of their game experiences."
When asked if this approach might impact on the field results, Christ said that the key now is to have players returning from their athletic endeavors unrecognizably groomed and demure, in order to play important roles in the campus community where no one is exposed to intolerant and offensive ideas, such as colliding with an opponent. She indicated that Cal was now considering a new water polo coach that was known for introducing film study as a means for match preparation, teaching players the auteur theory that treats films as a reflection of the coach's vision and art, all as part of changing with the times and Cal's new values.
When asked if there would not have been value to a full investigation, Christ indicated that most serious Cal fans - those found on the website Bear Insider, - didn't want to wait for some 1,000-page report which dealt with extensive interviews and included sworn medical affidavits and other unnecessarily burdensome and time consuming activities. They wanted immediate action. She wanted to give these fans, many who are donors, what they wanted.
As for replacing Coach Wilcox, Chancellor Christ is considering selecting one particular poster on Bear Insider who claims Cal would have had a 915 winning percentage and five Rose Bowls wins in over 22 consecutive winning seasons, if only the Cal coaches would have listened to him.
Finally, Chancellor Christ indicated Coach McKeever had been demoted to the position of Vice-Chancellor of Undergraduate Studies, where she will oversee the studies of undergrad students, who Christ noted provide no real value to Berkeley, such as cutting edge research, and simply add to Campus deficits. Chancellor Christ refused to discuss the specifics of Coach McKeever's demotion, citing privacy concerns.
Great post. Finally some real levity out of a bad situation
The one thing that was missing was a move to remove all the "L's" from the record books on the current Cal BB team. They make the BB team members feel bad because of the image of themselves as loosers
Back so soon and with more repetitive remarks? Maybe you can ask one of the famous roommates of yours when your not jet setting, to talk to your friend who is not involved in this investigation, but is clearly covering the University's butt ,to read Alex Morgan's mind to see if there is anything new you can say about all the swimmers you personally know, so you can write the Chancellor to tell her how to run the University like you used to do when you wrote articles for Grey Bear.DiabloWags said:bearister said:
You guys are scaring me. I thought I lived in a universe where you teamed up to kick me in the nuts every Sunday when I post a Robert Reich op ed. You can't change your positions on the sun dial like that. I'm an elderly feeble pensioner that can't bear up under that strain.
When that pompous neighbor of yours from down the street shows up at your XMAS PARTY 30 years after the Lou Campanelli "investigation" bragging about being able to name "names" ....
Hahahahaha!!!
bearister said:
I requested that but I've been advised that only the Tech Talk forum will take it.
What about "Classic Posts/Good Laughers"?
No?
The number of witnesses has grown. Instead of one investigator, why not 2, or 3? The lack of urgency is appalling.
OCR: "To date 34 current or former Cal swimmers, 17 parents, a former member of the Goldens Bears' men's swimming and diving squad, two former Cal coaches and two other athletic department employees have told SCNG how McKeever routinely bullied swimmers, often in deeply personal terms,..."
OCR: "To date 34 current or former Cal swimmers, 17 parents, a former member of the Goldens Bears' men's swimming and diving squad, two former Cal coaches and two other athletic department employees have told SCNG how McKeever routinely bullied swimmers, often in deeply personal terms,..."
She has led Cal's swimming and diving for 29 years. What is the time period of the witnessed events?
https://calbears.com/sports/womens-swimming-and-diving/roster/coaches/teri-mckeever/5412
https://calbears.com/sports/womens-swimming-and-diving/roster/coaches/teri-mckeever/5412
Two thoughts.
1) If this has truly been going on for decades, a thorough investigation and resolution within two weeks is an unreasonable expectation.
2) To suggest that a coach is racist simply because they say a black athlete has an attitude problem is complete BS, and racist per-se. It's one thing if she had said "your black attitude." But that's not what happened, per the article, and it's the only thing referenced in the original article. They seem so be scratching for shock value there, to get more eyeballs, and it doesn't pass the smell test.
1) If this has truly been going on for decades, a thorough investigation and resolution within two weeks is an unreasonable expectation.
2) To suggest that a coach is racist simply because they say a black athlete has an attitude problem is complete BS, and racist per-se. It's one thing if she had said "your black attitude." But that's not what happened, per the article, and it's the only thing referenced in the original article. They seem so be scratching for shock value there, to get more eyeballs, and it doesn't pass the smell test.
The number of complaining swimmers is less than a single year's roster. Most of the swimmers complaining reported stuff that appeared to me as somewhat entitlement oriented and hiding behind the "bully" label. The most troubling stuff involved just a few swimmers. Most of it is fairly recent. That troubling stuff, such as dropping a racial epithet (and despite the comments here I have only read about one incident) is 'crossing lines' no matter when it was done, and needs to be investigated.oski003 said:
She has led Cal's swimming and diving for 29 years. What is the time period of the witnessed events?
https://calbears.com/sports/womens-swimming-and-diving/roster/coaches/teri-mckeever/5412
Reid went after Mater Dei a few years ago, and in particular accused their coach of creating a "a toxic culture where hazing and violence were encouraged." There are a constant barrage of articles by the journalist about Mater Dei hiding behind a wall of silence, where the accusations were regurgitated, as another "victim" had come forward. There are player parents on the pay site that have spoken about the journalist. This thread is very different than the conversations on the pay site.
When asked if there would not have been value to a full investigation, Christ indicated that most serious Cal fans - those found on the website Bear Insider, - didn't want to wait for some 1,000-page report which dealt with extensive interviews and included sworn medical affidavits and other unnecessarily burdensome and time consuming activities. They wanted immediate action. She wanted to give these fans, many who are donors, what they wanted.movielover said:
The number of witnesses has grown. Instead of one investigator, why not 2, or 3? The lack of urgency is appalling.
OCR: "To date 34 current or former Cal swimmers, 17 parents, a former member of the Goldens Bears' men's swimming and diving squad, two former Cal coaches and two other athletic department employees have told SCNG how McKeever routinely bullied swimmers, often in deeply personal terms,..."
juarezbear said:We must've crossed paths at some point. I believe Carlos graduated in 78 or 79. I graduated in 80 and loved watching Pete Cutino roam the deck while leading our team to victory. I was also friendly with a few members of the men's and women's swim teams who were in Unit 1 with me freshman year. It all feels so quaint in retrospect.DiabloWags said:juarezbear said:DiabloWags said:juarezbear said:
I hope Knowlton and the big swim donors are putting together a list of potential coaches as we type. It would be typiCAL to see our AD wait and around and start from scratch when the report comes in rather than be nimble and ahead of the game. I am an ex Cal athlete and have great love for the school and our athletic teams. I have a particular pride in all of our aquatic sports which have all achieved great success in the pool and the classroom. Frankly, aquatics have been our best consistently performing sports for decades. Our women's water polo team had a bad coach for a long time and suffered as a result. We even missed out on Maggie Steffins because of him. Simmons has the team on an upswing but it's been an uphill battle. Bottom line is I hope and pray the women's swim team can bounce back quickly and reassume its position as a marquee program.
Thank you for your heartfelt post as a Cal Bear and former Cal athlete.
Yes, we got Charlie but we missed out on Maggie because of a bad coach.
I often thought that she was MJ and Maureen O'Toole's daughter Kelly Mendoza was Pippin at Monte Vista.
As you probably know, Mendoza started off at Cal and scored 27 goals as a freshman, but transferred to 'SC.
I was actually a freshman when Carlos was a senior, but I lived in the same dorm as Pete Cutino, Jr, and his roomie Alan Miller when I was a sophomore. About a dozen years later I ran into Peter on a 747 one night coming back from NYC and heading to California. He was living over in Spain and working as an architect.
I'm with you 100%.
As you know, food service in Unit 2 was closed on the weekends, so we headed over to Unit 1 for our weekend meals. I believe freestyle sprinter David Boatwright was in Unit 1 with some other guys. He was a fish! Retired a couple of years ago from the Concord Public Works Dept. His Dad was a former State Senator who died of cancer 10 years ago.
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
Oski003 - I've read reports going back to 2001. A 2012 Chronicle article by John Crumpacker describes her giving "tough love", being "authoritative", the oldest of 10 children, and quoting her as being "almost a 100 percent introvert."
First, put at least two or three investigators on this. I believe most agree slow-walking this is untenable.
I believe the lawyers synopsis still stands. Let's say there are 60 witnesses. Some will have only seen one or two episodes of mistreatment - those should be short interviews, easily documented. Some parents may primarily authenticate their daughters complaints. Most likely a pattern will emerge. If there were one to three athletes targeted every year, those will be focus points with corroboration.
Did staff alert the proper authorities? If true, galling issues are possible severance packages for coaches and administrators who didn't protect these young women.
I had no idea that USA Swimming top coaches were 85% male, and that the mistreatment of young swimmers was a big issue.
"Racism" - we don't have any alleged facts here, and competing politics. It took a long time for the racist comments of WNBA star Liz Cambage to be published. Not liking rap music isn't illegal, but it probably offends the woke crowd.
bearsandgiants said:
Two thoughts.
1) If this has truly been going on for decades, a thorough investigation and resolution within two weeks is an unreasonable expectation.
2) To suggest that a coach is racist simply because they say a black athlete has an attitude problem is complete BS, and racist per-se. It's one thing if she had said "your black attitude." But that's not what happened, per the article, and it's the only thing referenced in the original article. They seem so be scratching for shock value there, to get more eyeballs, and it doesn't pass the smell test.
First, put at least two or three investigators on this. I believe most agree slow-walking this is untenable.
I believe the lawyers synopsis still stands. Let's say there are 60 witnesses. Some will have only seen one or two episodes of mistreatment - those should be short interviews, easily documented. Some parents may primarily authenticate their daughters complaints. Most likely a pattern will emerge. If there were one to three athletes targeted every year, those will be focus points with corroboration.
Did staff alert the proper authorities? If true, galling issues are possible severance packages for coaches and administrators who didn't protect these young women.
I had no idea that USA Swimming top coaches were 85% male, and that the mistreatment of young swimmers was a big issue.
"Racism" - we don't have any alleged facts here, and competing politics. It took a long time for the racist comments of WNBA star Liz Cambage to be published. Not liking rap music isn't illegal, but it probably offends the woke crowd.
movielover said:
Did staff alert the proper authorities? If true, galling issues are possible severance packages for coaches and administrators who didn't protect these young women.
The Cal swimmer (Clark) who had her Crohn's Disease medical condition "outed" by McKeever during a team meeting that she was not invited to attend, reported this violation of federal privacy law to Chief of Staff and Senior Women's Administrator, Jennifer Simon-O'Neill. She documented this complaint, but added that there was nothing she could do, aside from educate McKeever on federal privacy guidelines.
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
I have been involved as a witness to two investigations in the work world. They were far les complicated, and involved far less people and time periods than the McKeever situations. And yet the investigations took about 3 months to play out. Since the people involved both times where physically near my office, I was interviewed twice both times, a preliminary interview and then a follow-up after other people were interviewed. So expect a lot of people to get multiple interviews. Let's look at the distinctions in the situations:movielover said:
Oski003 - I've read reports going back to 2001. A 2012 Chronicle article by John Crumpacker describes her giving "tough love", being "authoritative", the oldest of 10 children, and quoting her as being "almost a 100 percent introvert."bearsandgiants said:
Two thoughts.
1) If this has truly been going on for decades, a thorough investigation and resolution within two weeks is an unreasonable expectation.
2) To suggest that a coach is racist simply because they say a black athlete has an attitude problem is complete BS, and racist per-se. It's one thing if she had said "your black attitude." But that's not what happened, per the article, and it's the only thing referenced in the original article. They seem so be scratching for shock value there, to get more eyeballs, and it doesn't pass the smell test.
First, put at least two or three investigators on this. I believe most agree slow-walking this is untenable.
I believe the lawyers synopsis still stands. Let's say there are 60 witnesses. Some will have only seen one or two episodes of mistreatment - those should be short interviews, easily documented. Some parents may primarily authenticate their daughters complaints. Most likely a pattern will emerge. If there were one to three athletes targeted every year, those will be focus points with corroboration.
Did staff alert the proper authorities? If true, galling issues are possible severance packages for coaches and administrators who didn't protect these young women.
I had no idea that USA Swimming top coaches were 85% male, and that the mistreatment of young swimmers was a big issue.
"Racism" - we don't have any alleged facts here, and competing politics. It took a long time for the racist comments of WNBA star Liz Cambage to be published. Not liking rap music isn't illegal, but it probably offends the woke crowd.
1) Knowing the allegations. In my case that was no brainer. Here you have allegations, a lot of them quite general, from a newspaper article(s). The investigators need to get a written (or verbal which is less preferable) complaint that is a summary of concerns, which will need to be explored further with the complainants to draw out the specific detail needed to draft a procedurally fair set of allegations. For an allegation to be considered procedurally fair it should contain as a minimum, who was allegedly involved, what is alleged to have occurred and when. This will take some time given the number of people and time frames involved. This means that many complaints will need to be interviewed more than once to address likely conflicts in asserted facts.
2) Lawyers. None in my case. Every participant has the right to have a person they are comfortable with present while they participate in an investigative process (typically the interview). Under the Title 9 and Cal rules, the support person is there to offer only moral support to the person. They are not there to advocate or speak on behalf of the participant. This is SOP. Interference from a support person can be very disruptive and can be remedied by ensuring that the support person understands their role before they participate. Non-employes don't necessary have to follow those rules, which means negotiating with lawyers. For example, there was an accusation by a former Olympics coach that Terry fired. She will likely not be willing to come for the interview without her own counsel and different rules, since she could face a suit from Terry at some point. Something will have to be negotiated. There is no guarantee that non-employees will agree to cooperate, but the investigators have to take the time to give it a shot. And then there is getting Terry's cooperation, and no doubt she will be lawyered-up.
3) Number of people involved and time period covered and breath of allegations. Mine involved a limited number of employees. Good grief, just 60 people? The law firm has to make arrangements and interview much of the present team, many graduates, employees, former employees, parents, various doctors, a good portion of the AD staff (or even former staff) given that the investigation will look at they conduct in handling accusations, members to men's swim team, members of Olympics teams, and others as the investigation develops. And again, they may have to request multiple interviews. Given that every complaint has the potential to become a lawsuit, the investigators need to investigate every accusation in a manner in which it can be presented to a court of law, if necessary. So every potential witness needs to be considered.
4) Cooperation issues. Employees are required to be witnesses and provide information under policies at the convenience of the employer, which made my investigation go rather efficiently. The law firm doing the investigation will have no such power over most of the witnesses. They probably will have to wait for non-employee scheduling and decide which of the interviews need to be done live, which likely involves someone traveling. I suspect there will need to be negotiations with the attorneys for McKeever and some of the accusers.
5) Qualified investigators don't grow on trees. Even the largest law firms don't have that many employment attorneys qualified to do investigations and guess what, they have other clients who also have important investigations, that may be even much more high profile than a college swim team coach.
6) There is a lot more information involved. In my situations there was information to be managed, prep by the investigator, time for analysis and drafting of findings. Thus, 3 months. There is going to be mountain more of information here. Thousands of pages of clear and detailed records of the investigation are going to have to be developed to support investigation findings. A complete investigation needs to develop a witness list, sources for information and evidence, interview questions targeted to elicit crucial information and details, and a process for retention of documentation and other technical aspects that take time.
7) Developing Evidence. Not much in the cases I was in. Basically he said, she said, and a lot of asking people what they saw. Here there are allegations that involve health issues, so there is a ton of medical evidence to evaluate when it comes to the overtraining complaint. There is the argument that the D1 swimmer contemplating suicide had other issues than just the coach. So that is very broad look at the complaint's medical history and phycological profile. There may be that some complainant's won't be willing to provide all the requested medical data, but the investigator has to take the time to try to get the information.
The suggestion about how little time this investigation should take are as naive as the commentary about having D1 coaches that never shout, get angry, curse, or whatever is in their snowflake minds.
I had a different take on the complaints - if we are talking about the ones from the article. I didn't view the majority of them as stemming from a sense of entitlement, but I may need to re-read it. My impression was that the "racial bias" one could be simply a generational difference regarding music. Now i understand that the reporter has sensationalized other stories in the past and we need to wait for the investigation. That being said, the one thing that is really troubling about the allegations is that the coach would pick on 2-3 swimmers each year and pretty much make them bear the brunt of all her anger. If that turns out to be true, that is pretty sadistic.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Rtkbear said:
Now i understand that the reporter has sensationalized other stories in the past and we need to wait for the investigation. That being said, the one thing that is really troubling about the allegations is that the coach would pick on 2-3 swimmers each year and pretty much make them bear the brunt of all her anger. If that turns out to be true, that is pretty sadistic.
Which other stories has Scott Reid "sensationalized" in your opinion?
His reporting in 2012 and 2013 on sexual abuse within USA Swimming that lead to the banishment of two top level coaches, or his reporting in 2011 on wide spread sexual abuse within USA Gymnastics and the governing body's failure to address it?
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
There are several allegations which if true, are cause for termination and wondering where was the oversight. But as you can see, there is a lot to these investigations to get to a better understanding of what happened than what is basically one article, regurgitated.Rtkbear said:
I had a different take on the complaints - if we are talking about the ones from the article. I didn't view the majority of them as stemming from a sense of entitlement, but I may need to re-read it. My impression was that the "racial bias" one could be simply a generational difference regarding music. Now i understand that the reporter has sensationalized other stories in the past and we need to wait for the investigation. That being said, the one thing that is really troubling about the allegations is that the coach would pick on 2-3 swimmers each year and pretty much make them bear the brunt of all her anger. If that turns out to be true, that is pretty sadistic.
The difference between a right wing conspiracy and the truth is about 20 months.
Sorry I should have said "alleged" to have sensationalized, based on what other posters have said. I found his story very compelling but will try not to leap to conclusions.
wifeisafurd said:I have been involved as a witness to two investigations in the work world. They were far les complicated, and involved far less people and time periods than the McKeever situations. And yet the investigations took about 3 months to play out. Since the people involved both times where physically near my office, I was interviewed twice both times, a preliminary interview and then a follow-up after other people were interviewed. So expect a lot of people to get multiple interviews. Let's look at the distinctions in the situations:movielover said:
Oski003 - I've read reports going back to 2001. A 2012 Chronicle article by John Crumpacker describes her giving "tough love", being "authoritative", the oldest of 10 children, and quoting her as being "almost a 100 percent introvert."bearsandgiants said:
Two thoughts.
1) If this has truly been going on for decades, a thorough investigation and resolution within two weeks is an unreasonable expectation.
2) To suggest that a coach is racist simply because they say a black athlete has an attitude problem is complete BS, and racist per-se. It's one thing if she had said "your black attitude." But that's not what happened, per the article, and it's the only thing referenced in the original article. They seem so be scratching for shock value there, to get more eyeballs, and it doesn't pass the smell test.
First, put at least two or three investigators on this. I believe most agree slow-walking this is untenable.
I believe the lawyers synopsis still stands. Let's say there are 60 witnesses. Some will have only seen one or two episodes of mistreatment - those should be short interviews, easily documented. Some parents may primarily authenticate their daughters complaints. Most likely a pattern will emerge. If there were one to three athletes targeted every year, those will be focus points with corroboration.
Did staff alert the proper authorities? If true, galling issues are possible severance packages for coaches and administrators who didn't protect these young women.
I had no idea that USA Swimming top coaches were 85% male, and that the mistreatment of young swimmers was a big issue.
"Racism" - we don't have any alleged facts here, and competing politics. It took a long time for the racist comments of WNBA star Liz Cambage to be published. Not liking rap music isn't illegal, but it probably offends the woke crowd.
1) Knowing the allegations. In my case that was no brainer. Here you have allegations, a lot of them quite general, from a newspaper article(s). The investigators need to get a written (or verbal which is less preferable) complaint that is a summary of concerns, which will need to be explored further with the complainants to draw out the specific detail needed to draft a procedurally fair set of allegations. For an allegation to be considered procedurally fair it should contain as a minimum, who was allegedly involved, what is alleged to have occurred and when. This will take some time given the number of people and time frames involved. This means that many complaints will need to be interviewed more than once to address likely conflicts in asserted facts.
2) Lawyers. None in my case. Every participant has the right to have a person they are comfortable with present while they participate in an investigative process (typically the interview). Under the Title 9 and Cal rules, the support person is there to offer only moral support to the person. They are not there to advocate or speak on behalf of the participant. This is SOP. Interference from a support person can be very disruptive and can be remedied by ensuring that the support person understands their role before they participate. Non-employes don't necessary have to follow those rules, which means negotiating with lawyers. For example, there was an accusation by a former Olympics coach that Terry fired. She will likely not be willing to come for the interview without her own counsel and different rules, since she could face a suit from Terry at some point. Something will have to be negotiated. There is no guarantee that non-employees will agree to cooperate, but the investigators have to take the time to give it a shot. And then there is getting Terry's cooperation, and no doubt she will be lawyered-up.
3) Number of people involved and time period covered and breath of allegations. Mine involved a limited number of employees. Good grief, just 60 people? The law firm has to make arrangements and interview much of the present team, many graduates, employees, former employees, parents, various doctors, a good portion of the AD staff (or even former staff) given that the investigation will look at they conduct in handling accusations, members to men's swim team, members of Olympics teams, and others as the investigation develops. And again, they may have to request multiple interviews. Given that every complaint has the potential to become a lawsuit, the investigators need to investigate every accusation in a manner in which it can be presented to a court of law, if necessary. So every potential witness needs to be considered.
4) Cooperation issues. Employees are required to be witnesses and provide information under policies at the convenience of the employer, which made my investigation go rather efficiently. The law firm doing the investigation will have no such power over most of the witnesses. They probably will have to wait for non-employee scheduling and decide which of the interviews need to be done live, which likely involves someone traveling. I suspect there will need to be negotiations with the attorneys for McKeever and some of the accusers.
5) Qualified investigators don't grow on trees. Even the largest law firms don't have that many employment attorneys qualified to do investigations and guess what, they have other clients who also have important investigations, that may be even much more high profile than a college swim team coach.
6) There is a lot more information involved. In my situations there was information to be managed, prep by the investigator, time for analysis and drafting of findings. Thus, 3 months. There is going to be mountain more of information here. Thousands of pages of clear and detailed records of the investigation are going to have to be developed to support investigation findings. A complete investigation needs to develop a witness list, sources for information and evidence, interview questions targeted to elicit crucial information and details, and a process for retention of documentation and other technical aspects that take time.
7) Developing Evidence. Not much in the cases I was in. Basically he said, she said, and a lot of asking people what they saw. Here there are allegations that involve health issues, so there is a ton of medical evidence to evaluate when it comes to the overtraining complaint. There is the argument that the D1 swimmer contemplating suicide had other issues than just the coach. So that is very broad look at the complaint's medical history and phycological profile. There may be that some complainant's won't be willing to provide all the requested medical data, but the investigator has to take the time to try to get the information.
The suggestion about how little time this investigation should take are as naive as the commentary about having D1 coaches that never shout, get angry, curse, or whatever is in their snowflake minds.
I think it is a mistake to view this as a typical corporate employment harassment complaint or a criminal prosecution.
What was the investigation into Lou Campanelli before he was fired? Tom Holmoe? Ben Braun? sonny Dykes? Coaches can be fired for any reason or no real reason at all. Just "we decided to move in a new direction." Then they get their agreed upon payout.
A university athletic department is different than a company or even a government office. My view is the athletic department exists, not for the coaches, not for the administrators, not for the donors, but for the student-athletes. Everyone else is there to support them. A coach is hired to recruit athletes to Cal and guide them to becoming better at their sport all while guiding them through a stressful academic environment and time of life. A coach needs to be seen as an ally, not as one more challenge, certainly not a reason to contemplate suicide.
Justin Wilcox has more pressure to succeed, he is dealing with the most "macho" sport, but at least he treats the players well and shows obvious care for their personal welfare. It is not to much to ask the women's swim coach to do the same.
Everyone I know that rowed crew under Gladstone loved that guy. They didn't have to wake up at o'dark 30 on a cold Berkeley morning to row but they wanted to. Same with a Jack Clark and rugby. I want coaches at Cal that are positive motivators, not authoritarians. Picking on one person is a tactic used by cult leaders to control the group. They use it because it is effective. It gets results. It is not illegal, it may not even violate university policy, but it absolutely should not be used by a coach at Cal. Again, I want Cal student-athletes to feel supported by their coach and their athletic department. I want them to be happy they chose Cal. Suicidal is the opposite.
A sport like swimming is different than football or basketball, where parents are often upset if their kid isn't starting or getting playing time. Swimmers swim. They are timed. It is an objective process. Moreover they are used to working hard or they would not have been recruited by Cal. I don't think this many parents come forward unless they are really concerned about their daughters' welfare. Really concerned.
The determination needs to be made quickly whether Teri McKeever is the right person to lead Cal swimming going forward. That should be done primarily by interviewing the current Cal swimmers individually. Determining what is best for them and for the program (future swimmers) going forward.
Calling Cal student athletes "snowflakes" is not helpful. Yes, times have changed, what was acceptable 40 or 50 years ago, what athletes were willing to accept, is not acceptable now. That was true back then too. Athletes in the 70s and 80s would not tolerate what was going on in the 20s and 30s.
Again, the question and focus is not about making McKeever "wrong," the question is, is she RiGHT for Cal going forward?
It would have been far better if it had not gotten to this point. However, If the determination is made (relatively quickly) to go in a new direction, McKeever can be offered an administrative role, or retirement with the honor her accomplishments deserve. The current process, a six-month investigation with the prospect of McKeever potentially being fired for cause, leaving everyone in limbo is not healthy and is poor management. However, if in meetings with the student athletes, you gauge strong support for McKeever and believe the accusations of bullying and other abuse are baseless, then reassure the team and give them a plan going forward. If the vast majority of the team supports her then by all means, wait until she is cleared by the investigation. However, the determination of desired direction should not have to wait.
Unfortunately, I think this is beyond many on this board who went to Cal and should know better, much less Knowlton given that his management and sports experience is the US Army and military academies where authoritarian management styles are ingrained and not questioned. That is why he is such a bad fit for Cal in 2022.
Reid has written 8 articles on the swimming allegations in a period of 10 days. Most of those articles were repetitive and seemed to be designed to generate clicks and advance his narrative, with MANY anonymous quotes that seem to lack context. If you're going to extensively quote parents claiming 6 months is too long to investigate, maybe present the school's explanation as to the process and why it takes that long. Or at least ask the school for that and if they don't reply, report that. He did neither. I consider that sensationalized.DiabloWags said:Rtkbear said:
Now i understand that the reporter has sensationalized other stories in the past and we need to wait for the investigation. That being said, the one thing that is really troubling about the allegations is that the coach would pick on 2-3 swimmers each year and pretty much make them bear the brunt of all her anger. If that turns out to be true, that is pretty sadistic.
Which other stories has Scott Reid "sensationalized" in your opinion?
His reporting in 2012 and 2013 on sexual abuse within USA Swimming that lead to the banishment of two top level coaches, or his reporting in 2011 on wide spread sexual abuse within USA Gymnastics and the governing body's failure to address it?
Reid has written innumerable articles about Mater Dei - and seemingly only Mater Dei - with slanted presentations of the facts. One recent article dealt with allegations of abuse by a track coach from the 1980s which came to light in a lawsuit. If that's the standard for reporting, then there should be an awful lot of articles about abuse in other high schools that have resulted in recent lawsuits. Yet he hasn't written any that I could find. Only Mater Dei.
Another example - in the recent articles regarding the MD football hazing (November 2021), he reported the allegations in a plaintiff's complaint as if they were facts (not allegations), with extensive quotes from the parents and their attorney. As an example, in one case his sourcing is "records and interviews" which is about as vague as it gets.
The timing of such reporting was clearly coordinated with the parents and attorney to maximize their leverage in the civil lawsuit, failed to present the full set of facts, used a lot of incendiary language (a concussion became a "traumatic brain injury"), and initially failed to report a lot of facts that were contrary to his narrative (i.e., that OC DA had declined prosecution and that the athlete with the "continued" TBI symptoms had resumed playing sports at a new school).
Did bad things happen at MD? It seems so. But the reporting has been sensationalized by Reid and biased. I am getting the same sense re Cal swimming, as Reid seems to be parroting allegations from disgruntled parties without any independent verification or explanation of context.
Cal alum Catherine Breed - 2011 - 2015 - supports the Coach on her Instagram account. Breed was clear in that she's not addressing others experiences, only her own.
SwimSwam reposted her Instagram story. In part:
"...My story goes as follows and there's a lot more to it than I can write in an Instagram post so this may seem vague to you. When I struggled with my mental health because of some serious life upheavals Teri connected me with a life coach and a sports psychologist. She gave me the resources I needed because she understood the pain.
"When I struggled with my nutrition and weight she never once made me feel shame or called me fat. She connected me with Kristen and our nutritionist so I could have resources to learn how to better take care of myself. She understood the struggle.
"When I had to withdraw from WUGs because of my ACL tear I had a trip around Europe planned for after the meet. I was gutted to not be able to compete nor travel. She helped me get to Europe so that I could at least have that two week trip.
"My career at Cal was one of failure. I entered as a top recruit and by my senior year I did not even make NCAA. I failed at swimming, I failed at being a top academic, I failed at being a great captain, I failed over and over again. Teri did not guilt me about it, she did not take away my scholarship. We failed successfully.
"At one of my last meets I remember telling her I wish she was harder on me. She answered with tears in her eyes "I was afraid I would break you", she knew how much **** I was going through and she wanted to be there for me not worrying about my swimming but worrying about me as a person. She wanted me to understand people cared about me and people loved me even if the world didn't feel like that.
"I firmly believe Teri is not a monster. For every story in the article there are stories like mine. Teri wanted us to be strong women first and love the water second. I will always be proud to have swam at Cal."
Catherine Breed is now a successful and record-breaking open water swimmer.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CeBskLyLKyA/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
https://swimswam.com/former-cal-swimmer-catherine-breed-speaks-out-for-teri-mckeever/
SwimSwam reposted her Instagram story. In part:
"...My story goes as follows and there's a lot more to it than I can write in an Instagram post so this may seem vague to you. When I struggled with my mental health because of some serious life upheavals Teri connected me with a life coach and a sports psychologist. She gave me the resources I needed because she understood the pain.
"When I struggled with my nutrition and weight she never once made me feel shame or called me fat. She connected me with Kristen and our nutritionist so I could have resources to learn how to better take care of myself. She understood the struggle.
"When I had to withdraw from WUGs because of my ACL tear I had a trip around Europe planned for after the meet. I was gutted to not be able to compete nor travel. She helped me get to Europe so that I could at least have that two week trip.
"My career at Cal was one of failure. I entered as a top recruit and by my senior year I did not even make NCAA. I failed at swimming, I failed at being a top academic, I failed at being a great captain, I failed over and over again. Teri did not guilt me about it, she did not take away my scholarship. We failed successfully.
"At one of my last meets I remember telling her I wish she was harder on me. She answered with tears in her eyes "I was afraid I would break you", she knew how much **** I was going through and she wanted to be there for me not worrying about my swimming but worrying about me as a person. She wanted me to understand people cared about me and people loved me even if the world didn't feel like that.
"I firmly believe Teri is not a monster. For every story in the article there are stories like mine. Teri wanted us to be strong women first and love the water second. I will always be proud to have swam at Cal."
Catherine Breed is now a successful and record-breaking open water swimmer.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CeBskLyLKyA/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
https://swimswam.com/former-cal-swimmer-catherine-breed-speaks-out-for-teri-mckeever/
movielover said:
Cal alum Catherine Breed - 2011 - 2015 - supports the Coach on her Instagram account. Breed was clear in that she's not addressing others experiences, only her own.
SwimSwam reposted her Instagram story. In part:
"...My story goes as follows and there's a lot more to it than I can write in an Instagram post so this may seem vague to you. When I struggled with my mental health because of some serious life upheavals Teri connected me with a life coach and a sports psychologist. She gave me the resources I needed because she understood the pain.
"When I struggled with my nutrition and weight she never once made me feel shame or called me fat. She connected me with Kristen and our nutritionist so I could have resources to learn how to better take care of myself. She understood the struggle.
"When I had to withdraw from WUGs because of my ACL tear I had a trip around Europe planned for after the meet. I was gutted to not be able to compete nor travel. She helped me get to Europe so that I could at least have that two week trip.
"My career at Cal was one of failure. I entered as a top recruit and by my senior year I did not even make NCAA. I failed at swimming, I failed at being a top academic, I failed at being a great captain, I failed over and over again. Teri did not guilt me about it, she did not take away my scholarship. We failed successfully.
"At one of my last meets I remember telling her I wish she was harder on me. She answered with tears in her eyes "I was afraid I would break you", she knew how much **** I was going through and she wanted to be there for me not worrying about my swimming but worrying about me as a person. She wanted me to understand people cared about me and people loved me even if the world didn't feel like that.
"I firmly believe Teri is not a monster. For every story in the article there are stories like mine. Teri wanted us to be strong women first and love the water second. I will always be proud to have swam at Cal."
Catherine Breed is now a successful and record-breaking open water swimmer.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CeBskLyLKyA/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
https://swimswam.com/former-cal-swimmer-catherine-breed-speaks-out-for-teri-mckeever/
Nice. That is the type of testimonial I'd be looking for, but with a focus on current and recent swimmers.
A lot of Mater Dei parents say in that situation. On the pay site he is accused of embellishment by Mater Dei parents. He does seem to make a practice of repetitive articles. Impressive if he was the guy who broke the Gymnastics sex abuse scandal.DiabloWags said:Rtkbear said:
Now i understand that the reporter has sensationalized other stories in the past and we need to wait for the investigation. That being said, the one thing that is really troubling about the allegations is that the coach would pick on 2-3 swimmers each year and pretty much make them bear the brunt of all her anger. If that turns out to be true, that is pretty sadistic.
Which other stories has Scott Reid "sensationalized" in your opinion?
His reporting in 2012 and 2013 on sexual abuse within USA Swimming that lead to the banishment of two top level coaches, or his reporting in 2011 on wide spread sexual abuse within USA Gymnastics and the governing body's failure to address it?
BearGoggles said:Reid has written 8 articles on the swimming allegations in a period of 10 days. Most of those articles were repetitive and seemed to be designed to generate clicks and advance his narrative, with MANY anonymous quotes that seem to lack context. If you're going to extensively quote parents claiming 6 months is too long to investigate, maybe present the school's explanation as to the process and why it takes that long. Or at least ask the school for that and if they don't reply, report that. He did neither. I consider that sensationalized.DiabloWags said:Rtkbear said:
Now i understand that the reporter has sensationalized other stories in the past and we need to wait for the investigation. That being said, the one thing that is really troubling about the allegations is that the coach would pick on 2-3 swimmers each year and pretty much make them bear the brunt of all her anger. If that turns out to be true, that is pretty sadistic.
Which other stories has Scott Reid "sensationalized" in your opinion?
His reporting in 2012 and 2013 on sexual abuse within USA Swimming that lead to the banishment of two top level coaches, or his reporting in 2011 on wide spread sexual abuse within USA Gymnastics and the governing body's failure to address it?
With all due respect, you dont seem like youre paying much attention.
Either that, or your reading comprehension is poor.
That "process" wasnt fully characterized or explained until AD Knowlton finally figured out that he had misread the room during the Zoom Meeting with parents and countered a day later with an explanation.
That "explanation" was fully reported by Scott Reid.
Cal AD Knowlton responds to criticism after swim coach scandal (mercurynews.com)
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
BearGoggles said:
Did bad things happen at MD? It seems so. But the reporting has been sensationalized by Reid and biased. I am getting the same sense re Cal swimming, as Reid seems to be parroting allegations from disgruntled parties without any independent verification or explanation of context.
Again, it doesnt seem like you're paying attention.
First off, Reid is an investigative reporter for the Orange County Register.
And he primarily reports on Olympic sports.
Moreover, there is in fact documentation by the Cal Chief of Staff and Senior Woman Administrator (Jennifer Simon-O'Neill) regarding a specific complaint alleged by a Cal swimmer that clearly violated federal privacy law. It was alleged that Simon-O'Neill apologized to the swimmer (Clark) and then went on into a narrative that there wasnt anything that she could do to remedy the situation (where McKeever had disclosed Clark's medical situation of Crohn's Disease during a team meeting that Clark was not allowed to attend), adding that "'Teri is producing Olympians, she's an Olympic coach. There's really nothing more I can do for you.'
Do you really think that a senior Administrator in the Cal Athletic Department who is aware that there are investigations going on is going to comment to a journalist on the alleged violation of a federal privacy law by a Cal coach?
Think again.
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
I understand your concerns and also why from a non-legal background you take the positions you do.calumnus said:wifeisafurd said:I have been involved as a witness to two investigations in the work world. They were far les complicated, and involved far less people and time periods than the McKeever situations. And yet the investigations took about 3 months to play out. Since the people involved both times where physically near my office, I was interviewed twice both times, a preliminary interview and then a follow-up after other people were interviewed. So expect a lot of people to get multiple interviews. Let's look at the distinctions in the situations:movielover said:
Oski003 - I've read reports going back to 2001. A 2012 Chronicle article by John Crumpacker describes her giving "tough love", being "authoritative", the oldest of 10 children, and quoting her as being "almost a 100 percent introvert."bearsandgiants said:
Two thoughts.
1) If this has truly been going on for decades, a thorough investigation and resolution within two weeks is an unreasonable expectation.
2) To suggest that a coach is racist simply because they say a black athlete has an attitude problem is complete BS, and racist per-se. It's one thing if she had said "your black attitude." But that's not what happened, per the article, and it's the only thing referenced in the original article. They seem so be scratching for shock value there, to get more eyeballs, and it doesn't pass the smell test.
First, put at least two or three investigators on this. I believe most agree slow-walking this is untenable.
I believe the lawyers synopsis still stands. Let's say there are 60 witnesses. Some will have only seen one or two episodes of mistreatment - those should be short interviews, easily documented. Some parents may primarily authenticate their daughters complaints. Most likely a pattern will emerge. If there were one to three athletes targeted every year, those will be focus points with corroboration.
Did staff alert the proper authorities? If true, galling issues are possible severance packages for coaches and administrators who didn't protect these young women.
I had no idea that USA Swimming top coaches were 85% male, and that the mistreatment of young swimmers was a big issue.
"Racism" - we don't have any alleged facts here, and competing politics. It took a long time for the racist comments of WNBA star Liz Cambage to be published. Not liking rap music isn't illegal, but it probably offends the woke crowd.
1) Knowing the allegations. In my case that was no brainer. Here you have allegations, a lot of them quite general, from a newspaper article(s). The investigators need to get a written (or verbal which is less preferable) complaint that is a summary of concerns, which will need to be explored further with the complainants to draw out the specific detail needed to draft a procedurally fair set of allegations. For an allegation to be considered procedurally fair it should contain as a minimum, who was allegedly involved, what is alleged to have occurred and when. This will take some time given the number of people and time frames involved. This means that many complaints will need to be interviewed more than once to address likely conflicts in asserted facts.
2) Lawyers. None in my case. Every participant has the right to have a person they are comfortable with present while they participate in an investigative process (typically the interview). Under the Title 9 and Cal rules, the support person is there to offer only moral support to the person. They are not there to advocate or speak on behalf of the participant. This is SOP. Interference from a support person can be very disruptive and can be remedied by ensuring that the support person understands their role before they participate. Non-employes don't necessary have to follow those rules, which means negotiating with lawyers. For example, there was an accusation by a former Olympics coach that Terry fired. She will likely not be willing to come for the interview without her own counsel and different rules, since she could face a suit from Terry at some point. Something will have to be negotiated. There is no guarantee that non-employees will agree to cooperate, but the investigators have to take the time to give it a shot. And then there is getting Terry's cooperation, and no doubt she will be lawyered-up.
3) Number of people involved and time period covered and breath of allegations. Mine involved a limited number of employees. Good grief, just 60 people? The law firm has to make arrangements and interview much of the present team, many graduates, employees, former employees, parents, various doctors, a good portion of the AD staff (or even former staff) given that the investigation will look at they conduct in handling accusations, members to men's swim team, members of Olympics teams, and others as the investigation develops. And again, they may have to request multiple interviews. Given that every complaint has the potential to become a lawsuit, the investigators need to investigate every accusation in a manner in which it can be presented to a court of law, if necessary. So every potential witness needs to be considered.
4) Cooperation issues. Employees are required to be witnesses and provide information under policies at the convenience of the employer, which made my investigation go rather efficiently. The law firm doing the investigation will have no such power over most of the witnesses. They probably will have to wait for non-employee scheduling and decide which of the interviews need to be done live, which likely involves someone traveling. I suspect there will need to be negotiations with the attorneys for McKeever and some of the accusers.
5) Qualified investigators don't grow on trees. Even the largest law firms don't have that many employment attorneys qualified to do investigations and guess what, they have other clients who also have important investigations, that may be even much more high profile than a college swim team coach.
6) There is a lot more information involved. In my situations there was information to be managed, prep by the investigator, time for analysis and drafting of findings. Thus, 3 months. There is going to be mountain more of information here. Thousands of pages of clear and detailed records of the investigation are going to have to be developed to support investigation findings. A complete investigation needs to develop a witness list, sources for information and evidence, interview questions targeted to elicit crucial information and details, and a process for retention of documentation and other technical aspects that take time.
7) Developing Evidence. Not much in the cases I was in. Basically he said, she said, and a lot of asking people what they saw. Here there are allegations that involve health issues, so there is a ton of medical evidence to evaluate when it comes to the overtraining complaint. There is the argument that the D1 swimmer contemplating suicide had other issues than just the coach. So that is very broad look at the complaint's medical history and phycological profile. There may be that some complainant's won't be willing to provide all the requested medical data, but the investigator has to take the time to try to get the information.
The suggestion about how little time this investigation should take are as naive as the commentary about having D1 coaches that never shout, get angry, curse, or whatever is in their snowflake minds.
I think it is a mistake to view this as a typical corporate employment harassment complaint or a criminal prosecution.
The determination needs to be made quickly whether Teri McKeever is the right person to lead Cal swimming going forward. That should be done primarily by interviewing the current Cal swimmers individually. Determining what is best for them and for the program (future swimmers) going forward.
Again, the question and focus is not about making McKeever "wrong," the question is, is she RiGHT for Cal going forward?
It would have been far better if it had not gotten to this point. However, If the determination is made (relatively quickly) to go in a new direction, McKeever can be offered an administrative role, or retirement with the honor her accomplishments deserve. The current process, a six-month investigation with the prospect of McKeever potentially being fired for cause, leaving everyone in limbo is not healthy and is poor management. However, if in meetings with the student athletes, you gauge strong support for McKeever and believe the accusations of bullying and other abuse are baseless, then reassure the team and give them a plan going forward. If the vast majority of the team supports her then by all means, wait until she is cleared by the investigation. However, the determination of desired direction should not have to wait.
The problem is the Cal athletic department is not in charge here. The students and athletic department are part of a University and have to play by the school's rules. Cal, prompted by Congressional Legislation and court cases has put in place policies that must be followed (in fact, Cal is subject to a Federal consent decree to develop and enforce these policies). You can accuse whoever you want of poor management or whatever you feel is necessary to assuage your anger, but Cal is subject to basically to same rules as private employers for the types of allegations that have been made. And citing cases where the coach was fired because a team's won loss record didn't meet expectations doesn't change the equation. Lou probably would have been subject to an investigation if his conduct occurred today.
You can say pay Terry a ton of money to go away. But she probably will not accept that offer and instead want to vindicate her name, in which case you are right back to investigating her and waiting. But let's say she will take a huge payout. Who is going to pay it? You? Do we cut the crap out the future women's swimming budget for the next 50 years to fund it? That doesn't stop the requirements Cal must go through since Terry is not the only one being accused . And also because the law and Cal policy says these claims still have to be investigated. Not to mention Cal could get sued by accusing swimmers.
Or you could say terminate her. That might have been a great idea before these allegations went public. And you also want to start a modified investigation that violates Cal's own rules. From a legal perspective it could not get more dumb. if you terminate her now without due process, you might as well just roll the Brinks truck up to her front door. Not to mention you violated the consent decree. The cost to Cal could be astronomical, and it is Campus picking up the tab. If you think the Campus isn't willing to sacrifice a team to protect its mission, then you must have missed how Jason Wilcox was muted to defend his program against the City of Berkeley Health Department, so that Cal could get its building entitlements through the City of Berkeley.
The only scenario that this really plays out is the investigators find the "bad" accusations accurate and Terry is pushed out with her agreement or fired for cause. If will likely take a non-disclosure to make her voluntary leave, which is another reason an outside investigation under the cloak of attorney client privilege is being used. That said, I don't know how this plays out for the administrators who are under scrutiny. But I really don't see a scenario where "the determination of desired direction should not have to wait" is viable. Nor does it appear does Cal. Look for someone to be wearing the interim coach label for some time.
calumnus said:
I think it is a mistake to view this as a typical corporate employment harassment complaint or a criminal prosecution.
What was the investigation into Lou Campanelli before he was fired? Tom Holmoe? Ben Braun? sonny Dykes? Coaches can be fired for any reason or no real reason at all. Just "we decided to move in a new direction." Then they get their agreed upon payout.
A university athletic department is different than a company or even a government office. My view is the athletic department exists, not for the coaches, not for the administrators, not for the donors, but for the student-athletes. Everyone else is there to support them. A coach is hired to recruit athletes to Cal and guide them to becoming better at their sport all while guiding them through a stressful academic environment and time of life. A coach needs to be seen as an ally, not as one more challenge, certainly not a reason to contemplate suicide.
Bingo!
I can only assume that you were replying to a pompous narcissistic former attorney (that I put on ignore days ago) who loves nothing better but to sanctimoniously yap about the cases that he's been involved in with 1200 word essays. He couldnt see the forest through the trees if his life depended on it. He continues to compare "apples" with "oranges".
I repeat, It wont take 6 months to confirm a single allegation of abuse that allows the University to terminate her for cause. The due-process "crowd" here is living in an alternate reality.
Moreover, it would be a mistake for people to think that the Cal alumni donor group who totally funded the Legends Aquatic Center dont have deep pockets. The cost of Legends was $15 Million dollars.
Thank You for your post Calumnus.
"Cults don't end well. They really don't."
wifeisafurd said:I understand your concerns and also why from a non-legal background you take the positions you do.calumnus said:wifeisafurd said:I have been involved as a witness to two investigations in the work world. They were far les complicated, and involved far less people and time periods than the McKeever situations. And yet the investigations took about 3 months to play out. Since the people involved both times where physically near my office, I was interviewed twice both times, a preliminary interview and then a follow-up after other people were interviewed. So expect a lot of people to get multiple interviews. Let's look at the distinctions in the situations:movielover said:
Oski003 - I've read reports going back to 2001. A 2012 Chronicle article by John Crumpacker describes her giving "tough love", being "authoritative", the oldest of 10 children, and quoting her as being "almost a 100 percent introvert."bearsandgiants said:
Two thoughts.
1) If this has truly been going on for decades, a thorough investigation and resolution within two weeks is an unreasonable expectation.
2) To suggest that a coach is racist simply because they say a black athlete has an attitude problem is complete BS, and racist per-se. It's one thing if she had said "your black attitude." But that's not what happened, per the article, and it's the only thing referenced in the original article. They seem so be scratching for shock value there, to get more eyeballs, and it doesn't pass the smell test.
First, put at least two or three investigators on this. I believe most agree slow-walking this is untenable.
I believe the lawyers synopsis still stands. Let's say there are 60 witnesses. Some will have only seen one or two episodes of mistreatment - those should be short interviews, easily documented. Some parents may primarily authenticate their daughters complaints. Most likely a pattern will emerge. If there were one to three athletes targeted every year, those will be focus points with corroboration.
Did staff alert the proper authorities? If true, galling issues are possible severance packages for coaches and administrators who didn't protect these young women.
I had no idea that USA Swimming top coaches were 85% male, and that the mistreatment of young swimmers was a big issue.
"Racism" - we don't have any alleged facts here, and competing politics. It took a long time for the racist comments of WNBA star Liz Cambage to be published. Not liking rap music isn't illegal, but it probably offends the woke crowd.
1) Knowing the allegations. In my case that was no brainer. Here you have allegations, a lot of them quite general, from a newspaper article(s). The investigators need to get a written (or verbal which is less preferable) complaint that is a summary of concerns, which will need to be explored further with the complainants to draw out the specific detail needed to draft a procedurally fair set of allegations. For an allegation to be considered procedurally fair it should contain as a minimum, who was allegedly involved, what is alleged to have occurred and when. This will take some time given the number of people and time frames involved. This means that many complaints will need to be interviewed more than once to address likely conflicts in asserted facts.
2) Lawyers. None in my case. Every participant has the right to have a person they are comfortable with present while they participate in an investigative process (typically the interview). Under the Title 9 and Cal rules, the support person is there to offer only moral support to the person. They are not there to advocate or speak on behalf of the participant. This is SOP. Interference from a support person can be very disruptive and can be remedied by ensuring that the support person understands their role before they participate. Non-employes don't necessary have to follow those rules, which means negotiating with lawyers. For example, there was an accusation by a former Olympics coach that Terry fired. She will likely not be willing to come for the interview without her own counsel and different rules, since she could face a suit from Terry at some point. Something will have to be negotiated. There is no guarantee that non-employees will agree to cooperate, but the investigators have to take the time to give it a shot. And then there is getting Terry's cooperation, and no doubt she will be lawyered-up.
3) Number of people involved and time period covered and breath of allegations. Mine involved a limited number of employees. Good grief, just 60 people? The law firm has to make arrangements and interview much of the present team, many graduates, employees, former employees, parents, various doctors, a good portion of the AD staff (or even former staff) given that the investigation will look at they conduct in handling accusations, members to men's swim team, members of Olympics teams, and others as the investigation develops. And again, they may have to request multiple interviews. Given that every complaint has the potential to become a lawsuit, the investigators need to investigate every accusation in a manner in which it can be presented to a court of law, if necessary. So every potential witness needs to be considered.
4) Cooperation issues. Employees are required to be witnesses and provide information under policies at the convenience of the employer, which made my investigation go rather efficiently. The law firm doing the investigation will have no such power over most of the witnesses. They probably will have to wait for non-employee scheduling and decide which of the interviews need to be done live, which likely involves someone traveling. I suspect there will need to be negotiations with the attorneys for McKeever and some of the accusers.
5) Qualified investigators don't grow on trees. Even the largest law firms don't have that many employment attorneys qualified to do investigations and guess what, they have other clients who also have important investigations, that may be even much more high profile than a college swim team coach.
6) There is a lot more information involved. In my situations there was information to be managed, prep by the investigator, time for analysis and drafting of findings. Thus, 3 months. There is going to be mountain more of information here. Thousands of pages of clear and detailed records of the investigation are going to have to be developed to support investigation findings. A complete investigation needs to develop a witness list, sources for information and evidence, interview questions targeted to elicit crucial information and details, and a process for retention of documentation and other technical aspects that take time.
7) Developing Evidence. Not much in the cases I was in. Basically he said, she said, and a lot of asking people what they saw. Here there are allegations that involve health issues, so there is a ton of medical evidence to evaluate when it comes to the overtraining complaint. There is the argument that the D1 swimmer contemplating suicide had other issues than just the coach. So that is very broad look at the complaint's medical history and phycological profile. There may be that some complainant's won't be willing to provide all the requested medical data, but the investigator has to take the time to try to get the information.
The suggestion about how little time this investigation should take are as naive as the commentary about having D1 coaches that never shout, get angry, curse, or whatever is in their snowflake minds.
I think it is a mistake to view this as a typical corporate employment harassment complaint or a criminal prosecution.
The determination needs to be made quickly whether Teri McKeever is the right person to lead Cal swimming going forward. That should be done primarily by interviewing the current Cal swimmers individually. Determining what is best for them and for the program (future swimmers) going forward.
Again, the question and focus is not about making McKeever "wrong," the question is, is she RiGHT for Cal going forward?
It would have been far better if it had not gotten to this point. However, If the determination is made (relatively quickly) to go in a new direction, McKeever can be offered an administrative role, or retirement with the honor her accomplishments deserve. The current process, a six-month investigation with the prospect of McKeever potentially being fired for cause, leaving everyone in limbo is not healthy and is poor management. However, if in meetings with the student athletes, you gauge strong support for McKeever and believe the accusations of bullying and other abuse are baseless, then reassure the team and give them a plan going forward. If the vast majority of the team supports her then by all means, wait until she is cleared by the investigation. However, the determination of desired direction should not have to wait.
The problem is the Cal athletic department is not in charge here. The students and athletic department are part of a University and have to play by the school's rules. Cal, prompted by Congressional Legislation and court cases has put in place policies that must be followed (in fact, Cal is subject to a Federal consent decree to develop and enforce these policies). You can accuse whoever you want of poor management or whatever you feel is necessary to assuage your anger, but Cal is subject to basically to same rules as private employers for the types of allegations that have been made. And citing cases where the coach was fired because a team's won loss record didn't meet expectations doesn't change the equation. Lou probably would have been subject to an investigation if his conduct occurred today.
You can say pay Terry a ton of money to go away. But she probably will not accept that offer and instead want to vindicate her name, in which case you are right back to investigating her and waiting. But let's say she will take a huge payout. Who is going to pay it? You? Do we cut the crap out the future women's swimming budget for the next 50 years to fund it? That doesn't stop the requirements Cal must go through since Terry is not the only one being accused . And also because the law and Cal policy says these claims still have to be investigated. Not to mention Cal could get sued by accusing swimmers.
Or you could say terminate her. That might have been a great idea before these allegations went public. And you also want to start a modified investigation that violates Cal's own rules. From a legal perspective it could not get more dumb. if you terminate her now without due process, you might as well just roll the Brinks truck up to her front door. Not to mention you violated the consent decree. The cost to Cal could be astronomical, and it is Campus picking up the tab. If you think the Campus isn't willing to sacrifice a team to protect its mission, then you must have missed how Jason Wilcox was muted to defend his program against the City of Berkeley Health Department, so that Cal could get its building entitlements through the City of Berkeley.
The only scenario that this really plays out is the investigators find the "bad" accusations accurate and Terry is pushed out with her agreement or fired for cause. If will likely take a non-disclosure to make her voluntary leave, which is another reason an outside investigation under the cloak of attorney client privilege is being used. That said, I don't know how this plays out for the administrators who are under scrutiny. But I really don't see a scenario where "the determination of desired direction should not have to wait" is viable. Nor does it appear does Cal. Look for someone to be wearing the interim coach label for some time.
Wyking Jones was reportedly fired by Knowlton after several players went to Knowlton saying they wanted a change. Did that violate the university rules and laws that you have cited?
Coaches are fired all the time. Very, very rarely "for cause" (without pay). In fact, their contracts almost always stipulate what the payment will be if they are terminated. Therefore, it is permitted under their contract. That is different than "being paid to go away." It is following their contract. Their contract determines their employment, not university HR policies.
The investigation needs to continue, of course. I am just saying the women's swim program needs to be managed and the swimmers need to be taken care of.
A preferred direction needs to be decided on quickly. This is not an "informal investigation" it is not asking "what happened" it is asking the student athletes what they need and want going forward. If the team wants Teri back that gives you a path (subject to the results of the investigation), if they don't thst gives you a path.
Featured Stories
See All
Bears Get Great Reviews from Big Game Visitors
by Jim McGill
Bears Hammer Mercyhurst, 81-55.
by Jim McGill
Ultimate Insider Podcast E100: Stanford Wrap-up, SMU Preview
by Mike Pawlawski
From the Other Sideline: Cal vs SMU Preview
by Jim McGill
Cal Takes Down Arizona
by Cal Athletics