PonyFans.com

TCU staffers forced to fight or be fired.
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/2-TCU-Staffers-Forced-to-Fight-to-Resolve-Feud-Police-382070851.html?_osource=SocialFlowFB_DFWBrand

First Baylor, now TCU...please let SMU stay out of the news for any negative publicity.

I wonder if Patterson will find a way to sweep this under the rug.

Wow! You can't make this stuff up!

Rebel10 wrote:I wonder if Patterson will find a way to sweep this under the rug.

He doesn't have to...it had nothing to do with football.

I was hoping the staffers were football staffers.

Had the boss called HR, this would have dragged on for years. Now maybe both men will learn a bit more civility.

Well I guess when you can't resolve things in a civilized manner then violence is the answer at TCU.

...yeah I would have definitely taken the wrongful termination suit and just went home.


Stallion, am I correct that you're a lawyer? What could stick here?

Rebel10 wrote:I wonder if Patterson will find a way to sweep this under the rug.

No, he can't bend down to lift the rug.

vielsiehorsepower wrote:...yeah I would have definitely taken the wrongful termination suit and just went home.


Stallion, am I correct that you're a lawyer? What could stick here?

There really does not appear, from the facts presented in the story, to be any basis for a wrongful termination suit on this one. Absent the termination being based on someones protected class, in retaliation for for complaining about protected discrimination, or termination for refusal to commit an unlawful act, the boss could have fired both men for any or no reason at all.

smudubs wrote:

vielsiehorsepower wrote:...yeah I would have definitely taken the wrongful termination suit and just went home.


Stallion, am I correct that you're a lawyer? What could stick here?

There really does not appear, from the facts presented in the story, to be any basis for a wrongful termination suit on this one. Absent the termination being based on someones protected class, in retaliation for for complaining about protected discrimination, or termination for refusal to commit an unlawful act, the boss could have fired both men for any or no reason at all.

Does "Fight or you're out" seem like telling them to commit an unlawful act?

malonish wrote:

smudubs wrote:

vielsiehorsepower wrote:...yeah I would have definitely taken the wrongful termination suit and just went home.


Stallion, am I correct that you're a lawyer? What could stick here?

There really does not appear, from the facts presented in the story, to be any basis for a wrongful termination suit on this one. Absent the termination being based on someones protected class, in retaliation for for complaining about protected discrimination, or termination for refusal to commit an unlawful act, the boss could have fired both men for any or no reason at all.

Does "Fight or you're out" seem like telling them to commit an unlawful act?

Pretty much. What was it the cop said, mutual combat? Being coerced to fight with threat of termination is not willinglyengaging in combat

vielsiehorsepower wrote:
Pretty much. What was it the cop said, mutual combat? Being coerced to fight with threat of termination is not willinglyengaging in combat

"The officer told the man that he and his co-worker would be listed as suspects for disorderly conduct fighting as they had engaged in mutual combat, according to police."

So, disorderly conduct fighting is a crime and they were made to fight or they're out. Yeah, that's being forced to commit an illegal act or lose a job.