OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

[EdinboroFB]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

I saw the forum and wanted to state my views just as you all have been doing. I cannot say everything isn't true, and I never did. We are all allowed to have our own opinions. Apparently something I wrote struck a nerve that you would be so defensive.

"The complaint is filled with inaccuracies" and lots of "misinformation". Your first two posts on here. Its funny the first one quotes Bruce from the report. "filled with inaccuracies". hmmm.

You just made a serious accusation. Don't think youre anonymous on here when you make false allegations.

[EdinboroFB]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

Reading the forum and seeing you are closely connected to the situation, it is apparent wrestling is the true target. Pay at Edinboro is not based on gender. It also implies she is the only one at Edinboro that is faced with restrictions on recruiting. There are also numerous instances of heresay. It implies the plaintiff has been only compliant and adhering to university policies. School employees are mandatory reporters; if the plaintiff was aware of a situation involving a minor, she should have reported the incident to the appropriate officials and police. I hope this goes to a jury trial so the true circumstances and occurances can be revealed. The University needs to address the complaint and allegations so the public is aware, and this is not just a one sided, skewed story.

So you know what's going on in Mccomb? How?

[Fightingscot82]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

So you know what's going on in Mccomb? How?

Well we all know how you know! :laugh:

[iupgroundhog]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

I just read the specifics of the case again, not the actual lawsuit. It's shocking. The way I see it Bruce Baumgartner is in deep trouble over this.

Basically, every office and authority that reviewed the case agreed with Soboleski. Baumgartner unilaterally defied the recommendations of the PASSHE, the Edinboro Title IX/Social Equity Director, and the President of Edinboro University. Then you have the review by the EEOC which endorsed her right to sue. Right there that's where you hear the door slamming on any viable defense for Baumgartner and the athletics department. It seems outrageous to convene a third investigation into the situation after all these reviewers signed off on the issue. Then the "Retaliation" makes this into a classic case of discrimination. Negative actions by Baumgartner after all the complaints were made are easy to litigate as "retaliation."

I actually think Baumgartner might be forced to resign over this.

[Reiber]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

"The complaint is filled with inaccuracies" and lots of "misinformation". Your first two posts on here. Its funny the first one quotes Bruce from the report. "filled with inaccuracies". hmmm.

You just made a serious accusation. Don't think youre anonymous on here when you make false allegations.

Well, apparently you are all knowing and know what is true. We aren't allowed to have our opinions and feelings based on what we read and see. Your idea of slander and serious allegations are comical.

[VoiceOfReason]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

I am not certain, that the newspaper article provided all of the details.

The notice of Right to Sue, is not a guarantee that you have a viable cause of action, it simply means that EEOC has cleared you to pursue a claim in federal court, if you wish.

The EEOC makes no determination in the merits of the claim.

https://www.eeoc.gov/employees/lawsuit.cfm

If you read this link, it doesn't seem like much is required to move forward?

[Reiber]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

I just read the specifics of the case again, not the actual lawsuit. It's shocking. The way I see it Bruce Baumgartner is in deep trouble over this.

Basically, every office and authority that reviewed the case agreed with Soboleski. Baumgartner unilaterally defied the recommendations of the PASSHE, the Edinboro Title IX/Social Equity Director, and the President of Edinboro University. Then you have the review by the EEOC which endorsed her right to sue. Right there that's where you hear the door slamming on any viable defense for Baumgartner and the athletics department. It seems outrageous to convene a third investigation into the situation after all these reviewers signed off on the issue. Then the "Retaliation" makes this into a classic case of discrimination. Negative actions by Baumgartner after all the complaints were made are easy to litigate as "retaliation."

I actually think Baumgartner might be forced to resign over this.

If he did something that wrong, he should. But, if the staffing in the athletic department has been the same for quite some time, why are these allegations and complaints just now being made? Is it retaliation if the whole university is facing financial strains and cutbacks? If every authority that reviewed agreed, this would have been settled when it was initially brought about as stated in the lawsuit. We need to keep in mind that there are always two sides to every story. Did she take the claims to the EEOC? If it was a valid case, I would think she wouldn't waste any time and have went directly that route.

[Reiber]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

I do not know what is going on; hence why I said I hope this goes to a jury trial.

[EdinboroFB]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

Well, apparently you are all knowing and know what is true. We aren't allowed to have our opinions and feelings based on what we read and see. Your idea of slander and serious allegations are comical.

Referring to accusations of not reporting an issue with a minor? You better know to throw that out. Is that comical?

[EdinboroFB]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

If he did something that wrong, he should. But, if the staffing in the athletic department has been the same for quite some time, why are these allegations and complaints just now being made? Is it retaliation if the whole university is facing financial strains and cutbacks? If every authority that reviewed agreed, this would have been settled when it was initially brought about as stated in the lawsuit. We need to keep in mind that there are always two sides to every story. Did she take the claims to the EEOC? If it was a valid case, I would think she wouldn't waste any time and have went directly that route.

It was settled until a few decided they didn't like the settlement.

[EdinboroFB]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

I do not know what is going on; hence why I said I hope this goes to a jury trial.

You wrote earlier like you know exactly whats going on. Now you want to back away from that? Your earlier statement about hoping it goes to trial was basically saying so she gets put in her place.....if you read the context you put it in.

[VoiceOfReason]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

It was settled until a few decided they didn't like the settlement.

You keep accusing people of being someone? Dare we ask who you are?

also, worth noting.... b. Marketplace as a Factor Other Than Sex

Employers have also asserted that the marketplace is
a factor other than sex, arguing that they must pay a
male coach higher wages than they pay a female coach in
order to compete for him. The Commission has
distinguished the "marketplace value" defense from the
"market rate" defense. The "market rate" defense, which
has been rejected by the courts and the Commission, is
based on the employer's assumption that "women are
available for employment at lower rates of pay due to
'market' factors such as the principle of 'supply and
demand.'"31 The "marketplace value" defense is not
gender-based but rather is based on the employer's
consideration of an individual's value in setting wages.
Such consideration will qualify as a factor other than
sex only if the employer can demonstrate that it has
assessed the marketplace value of the particular
individual's job-related characteristics, and any salary
discrepancy is not based on sex.32 Sex discrimination in
the marketplace which results in lower pay for jobs done
by women will not support the marketplace value defense.

EXAMPLE:

A mid-sized college hires a man as head
basketball coach for its men's team. It pays
him a starting $100,000 base salary because
"that is the going rate" and what the salary
for that position has "traditionally" been.
This is twice the salary earned by the women's
basketball coach (a woman) even though the
men's and women's coaching jobs are
substantially equal. However, the man's
higher salary is not justified by any
particular type of experience, expertise or
skills required to coach the men's team but
not the women's team. Nor does the
particular man hired have job-related skills
whose marketplace value would justify the
higher salary. The college merely assumed it
would need to pay $100,000 to a coach for the
men's team. "Marketplace" is not a factor
other than sex.


https://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/coaches.html

[EdinboroFB]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

a

[iupgroundhog]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

I am not certain, that the newspaper article provided all of the details.

The notice of Right to Sue, is not a guarantee that you have a viable cause of action, it simply means that EEOC has cleared you to pursue a claim in federal court, if you wish.

The EEOC makes no determination in the merits of the claim.

https://www.eeoc.gov/employees/lawsuit.cfm

If you read this link, it doesn't seem like much is required to move forward?

I made the assertion I did based on a couple cases I was familiar with working in the private sector. Yes, I could be wrong and all cases are not the same but it's my understanding that the EEOC-based Right to Sue carries a lot of weight. EEOC has reviewed all the information available, generated a report, and has concluded there is a legitimate case. That's my understanding.

I would also add I think there is little chance this would actually go to a jury. This will be settled in some way or another.

[Reiber]

Re: OT: Title IX and Men's Sports

You wrote earlier like you know exactly whats going on. Now you want to back away from that? Your earlier statement about hoping it goes to trial was basically saying so she gets put in her place.....if you read the context you put it in.

You shouldn't read into statements. I meant what was stated that I hope it goes to trial so the true circumstances are revealed. We only know what one side says if that does not occur.