The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which is charged with enforcing Title VII, has also reached the same conclusion. In a policy guidance letter issued in 1990, the agency opined that “Title VII does not prohibit ... preferential treatment based upon consensual romantic relationships. An isolated instance of favoritism toward a ‘paramour’ ... may be unfair, but it does not discriminate against women or men in violation of Title VII, since both are disadvantaged for reasons other than their genders.” See EEOC Policy Guidance on Employer Liability Under VII for Sexual Favoritism, EEOC Notice No. 915–048 (January 12, 1990).

she says, " but your Honor, i had a lot of debt and he was my boss and powerful...he could ruin me...i was coerced into allowing his advances or risk losing my job, my fiance, and my standing in the community...i thought he was just a nice man then all of a sudden...plus you know its arkansas, people disappear"

$$$payday$$$

(04-11-2012 11:54 AM)shere khan Wrote:  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which is charged with enforcing Title VII, has also reached the same conclusion. In a policy guidance letter issued in 1990, the agency opined that “Title VII does not prohibit ... preferential treatment based upon consensual romantic relationships. An isolated instance of favoritism toward a ‘paramour’ ... may be unfair, but it does not discriminate against women or men in violation of Title VII, since both are disadvantaged for reasons other than their genders.” See EEOC Policy Guidance on Employer Liability Under VII for Sexual Favoritism, EEOC Notice No. 915–048 (January 12, 1990).

she says, " but your Honor, i had a lot of debt and he was my boss and powerful...he could ruin me...i was coerced into allowing his advances or risk losing my job, my fiance, and my standing in the community...i thought he was just a nice man then all of a sudden...plus you know its arkansas, people disappear"

$$$payday$$$

Sure, but there's been no evidence that this thing was anything but consensual. Hell, she got a PROMOTION. Generally, people that are being coerced are getting dumped on, not benefitted.

Know the mistake Jessica made? Instead of flying first class, she was riding coach.



Comment from the Commercial Appeal....hehehhehehhe

he shoulda said, i was riding home ran into jess, she said she had never ridden on a bike, i gave her a little ride, loaned her my helmet like i would any kid, she was scared and made me wreck....to insinuate anything more is rude, tacky and kinda gross...i am old enough to be her father. i originally didnt include her cause it just didnt matter and would become this big something over nothing.


then deny, deny, deny, deny, make them prove, then deny it again.

what a moron.

also, i agree it was consensual, i am just saying with the right attorney, its a payday. they would settle in a heartbeat. they cant fire her, they cant demote her. the irony is that she is in the drivers seat.

i bet she could even sue him personally for saying their relationship was "inappropriate", lawyers have been paid large for less.

lol

he was her boss, making it impossible to prove it was consensual.

(04-11-2012 12:13 PM)shere khan Wrote:  he shoulda said, i was riding home ran into jess, she said she had never ridden on a bike, i gave her a little ride, loaned her my helmet like i would any kid, she was scared and made me wreck....to insinuate anything more is rude, tacky and kinda gross...i am old enough to be her father. i originally didnt include her cause it just didnt matter and would become this big something over nothing.


then deny, deny, deny, deny, make them prove, then deny it again.

what a moron.

also, i agree it was consensual, i am just saying with the right attorney, its a payday. they would settle in a heartbeat. they cant fire her, they cant demote her. the irony is that she is in the drivers seat.

i bet she could even sue him personally for saying their relationship was "inappropriate", lawyers have been paid large for less.

lol

he was her boss, making it impossible to prove it was consensual.

but then he could turn around and say that the $20,000 gift was in fact blackmail or hush money something similar.

One of you is so way off here...

(04-11-2012 12:49 PM)Mimi Wrote:  One of you is so way off here...

I volunteer Mimi LOL

(04-11-2012 12:49 PM)Mimi Wrote:  One of you is so way off here...

like eddie murphy said back in the day,

he is a walking the dog, no house, ____ _____er

gooney goo goo, gus

(04-11-2012 12:35 PM)EarthBoundMisfit Wrote:  

(04-11-2012 12:13 PM)shere khan Wrote:  he shoulda said, i was riding home ran into jess, she said she had never ridden on a bike, i gave her a little ride, loaned her my helmet like i would any kid, she was scared and made me wreck....to insinuate anything more is rude, tacky and kinda gross...i am old enough to be her father. i originally didnt include her cause it just didnt matter and would become this big something over nothing.


then deny, deny, deny, deny, make them prove, then deny it again.

what a moron.

also, i agree it was consensual, i am just saying with the right attorney, its a payday. they would settle in a heartbeat. they cant fire her, they cant demote her. the irony is that she is in the drivers seat.

i bet she could even sue him personally for saying their relationship was "inappropriate", lawyers have been paid large for less.

lol

he was her boss, making it impossible to prove it was consensual.

but then he could turn around and say that the $20,000 gift was in fact blackmail or hush money something similar.

For several hours and perhaps a day or so, I could not recall exactly what happened right before and after the accident. Now that my memory is returning I am able to explain what happened.

As far as $20,000 is concerned, I thought it was a wedding gift, but now realize that she was blackmailing me and set up this chance motorcycle ride.

Exclusive footage of the wreck. From the CUSA board.

http://cdn1.sbnation.com/imported_assets...k_Chop.gif

(04-11-2012 02:22 PM)UofMTigers1 Wrote:  Exclusive footage of the wreck. From the CUSA board.

http://cdn1.sbnation.com/imported_assets...k_Chop.gif

All I can say is, it couldn't have happened to a more deserving university.

Some conspiracy nut called Sirius 91 hosts this morning...I forget the name- was just surfing while Howard was in commercial.

He said the injuries to Petrino are inconsistent with a motorcycle accident- let alone the fact that the woman was apparently uninjured, something he argued was impossible if she was riding.

He argued that the fiance and mistress likely tracked Petrini, got him and beat the crap out of him- and the motorcycle accident was a cover-up.

Really.

(04-11-2012 10:21 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(04-10-2012 08:31 PM)boss man Wrote:  

(04-10-2012 07:43 PM)k2tigers Wrote:  News conference...

Long is pissed

159 applicants for Dorrell's job

Petrino paid her $20K for reasons unknown

Termination for cause

Ouch

I eagerly await saluki's rationalization that this situation was no biggie; just a 50+ year old dude laying pipe with a young lady half his age. Certainly NOT a terminable offense, per saluki. He really went to bat for Petrino in that 4 page thread basically asking what it was exactly that warranted being fired.



Long's list solved that rather nicely.

159 applicants for the job??? But Hoghead Bobby hires his harlot. Truly good stuff; Arkansas needs to get ready for an avalanche of lawsuits from quite a few qualified applicants that did NOT even get an interview.

A $20,000 fee to this whore that is not explained? Perhaps a misappropriation of state funds; possibly a terminable offense.

And don't forget poor ol' Ms. Donnell. Her lawyer will paint her as an unwilling SUBORDINATE who felt harrassed/intimidated by this coach and only bumped uglies with him out of fear for her job.

Damn. And the Hog fans wanted this guy back?

Final note - people in Atlanta and Louisville are just laughing like hell.

Do me a favor,

Show where I EVER went "to bat" for Petrino.

Here's a synopsis of what most posts were about:

I wondered aloud as to "what" the reason would be for firing BP.

Was it because he was married, because of the age difference, because of the supervisory position...etc?

KnightLight then responded that the marriage status was irrelevant. So, my discussion then hinged on that premise.

I then wondered why BP would be introuble for "lying" to the AD about a motorcycle accident that had nothing to do with work. Not driving a company car, not going to a university function, not on work time. Just a private guy driving his private bike on his private time. Got into an accident that only really hurt himself. No major laws (dui, hit and run, etc..) were broken.

Why does he NEED to report that to the AD. If you get in a one car wreck on your off time, do you have to report it to your boss?

Then a bunch of people started throwing out "lawsuits" and how so and so has a cause of action.

I spent the majority of the rest of the thread just noting how absurd this was. For a society that hates lawyers, people sure do love to throw out the idea that people should sue.

What is Dorrell going to sue for. She, as a consenting adult, intentionally engaged in a sexual relationship with a married man twice her age, while she was engaged to be married. Why will she be "bought out?"

And again, as for the hiring and the lawsuits from those not selected, the girl was still otherwise qualified for the job--it is a glorified tour guide job. As another person posted, unless there is a lot more going on in the University regarding this type of behavior (for argument's sake, I'm assuming no) and if BP didn't FORCE Dorrell to submit to him sexually to get the job, then there is not action for discriminatory hiring.

Furthermore, as you know, I'm sure, the University (as a state enitity) has sovereign immunity from lawsuits.

The Arkansas Claims Commission has the authority to pay out for damages up to $10,000. That's it. Only the Arkansas State Legislature can authorize payments greater than that. Those who are throwing around this $5 million number are out of their minds. But we'll see.

So much for the big money lawsuit some predicted.

"She and I believe she should have the opportunity to move on."

Dorrell was given a $14,000 settlement and Arkansas officials said they have no immediate plans to reopen the position. Arkansas' immediate attention is on hiring a head football coach or deciding whether to use an interim coach for the 2012 season. Petrino's assistant head coach Taver Johnson is serving as the team's interim coach through the duration of spring football.



http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-s...18754.html