When will Barta be fired?

[HuckFinn]

I only wish that BG had built a case against Meyer, if indeed there was a case to be built. I was an administrator in an institution that has a similar climate to the U of I and we followed a well known, trusted, and fairly simple pattern.

1. Inform the employee of the pattern of behavior that is unacceptable in a private, oral setting. Prepare private notes from this meeting.
2. If the behaviors are not corrected, place a letter of reprimand in the employee file and warn them of further consequences.
3. If that does not change the pattern of behavior, a suspension, with or without pay, should be implemented.
4. And, finally, repeated violation of clearly stated prior requirements would result in termination.

This process can, on some occasions, be speeded up...an extreme example would be insubordination. (Barta may have had this opportunity, in fact.) But, the step by step is pretty hard for an employee to fight, unless they actually improve in their performance. Attorneys for the organization love this pattern; defense attorneys hate it.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

It doesn't matter how you see it. The verdict is in and the case is over.

My opinion doesn't matter anymore than anyone elses. Why are you singling mine out? My overarching point was that for the school to get past this Barta needs to be gone one way or the other and they need to clean house.

 

[tksirius]

I only wish that BG had built a case against Meyer, if indeed there was a case to be built. I was an administrator in an institution that has a similar climate to the U of I and we followed a well known, trusted, and fairly simple pattern.

1. Inform the employee of the pattern of behavior that is unacceptable in a private, oral setting. Prepare private notes from this meeting.
2. If the behaviors are not corrected, place a letter of reprimand in the employee file and warn them of further consequences.
3. If that does not change the pattern of behavior, a suspension, with or without pay, should be implemented.
4. And, finally, repeated violation of clearly stated prior requirements would result in termination.

This process can, on some occasions, be speeded up...an extreme example would be insubordination. (Barta may have had this opportunity, in fact.) But, the step by step is pretty hard for an employee to fight, unless they actually improve in their performance. Attorneys for the organization love this pattern; defense attorneys hate it.

The lack of this by UofI is why they should have attempted to settle.

 

[tksirius]

My opinion doesn't matter anymore than anyone elses. Why are you singling mine out? My overarching point was that for the school to get past this Barta needs to be gone one way or the other and they need to clean house.

Because, he's trying to get himself banned.

 

[OkstHawk]

Because, he's trying to get himself banned.

Banned for what? For telling the cry babies to get over it? Get real.

 

[OkstHawk]

My opinion doesn't matter anymore than anyone elses. Why are you singling mine out? My overarching point was that for the school to get past this Barta needs to be gone one way or the other and they need to clean house.

Not singling you out, just responding to your post. When did HN posters become such sensitive babies? Geez, I feel like this should be Golden Gopher nation or something. What are we going to complain about next...how the refs screwed GB over in the courtroom? Relax.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Because, he's trying to get himself banned.

Who knows. I just feel in this kind of deal more than one thing can be true. I felt that the domino starter of him firing the field hockey coach was justified and fine. He didn't need more of a reason to do that. What all happened after that the jury ruled the way they did and they were privy to a heck of a lot more info than I am. Now to get that stink off the program there's 2 things that have to happen. Clean house and let time go by. The faster you clean house the faster the time going by is on your side. The longer you drag it out the longer amount of time in which that cloud will be hanging around

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Not singling you out, just responding to your post. When did HN posters become such sensitive babies? Geez, I feel like this should be Golden Gopher nation or something. What are we going to complain about next...how the refs screwed GB over in the courtroom? Relax.

Your saying I'm a 'sensitive baby' for asking you why you singled out my post? By no means was I intending to pick a fight. I was just simply asking.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

I wonder to what effect the order in which these trials have happened may have an impact. Because good luck with Barta getting a fair shake at this next one. I think regardless of if Griesbaum abused any athletes or not why can't an AD fire her? ADs fire mens coaches in sports all the time for pretty much subjective reasons. New ADs that come in often let go coaches they inherit. Whys that any different? Being let go is being let go. Now if she is guilty of abusing even one student athlete then Barta was well within his rights to have dumped her and probably should have sooner. However now that Jane's trial is over with the outcome that it had is there even a smidgeon of a chance he'll get a fair shake in this one? I highly doubt it and the school should do whatever they can to settle it fire him and move on. However she might be out for vengeance and not want to settle either. Which will only make things worse if they go through another trial and he's found guilty..

 

[lightning1]

I'mnot saying anything is certain. I'm saying it's possible that everyone around her agreed she was horrible at her job. If that's the case, Barta did nothing wrong.

If that were the case, they are probably wondering how that idiot Barta never documented or took official issue with her performance. That alone is wrong and deserving of firing Barta.

 

[PCHawk]

If that were the case, they are probably wondering how that idiot Barta never documented or took official issue with her performance. That alone is wrong and deserving of firing Barta.

Good point.

 

[lightning1]

Good point.

Take your pick. Fire him because you believe he committed all of those offenses or fire him because he failed to do the basic part of his job requirements.

 

[DMLadyhawk]

Good point.

Somewhere I read that it is possible that nothing was documented by Gary Barta because of the Freedom of Information Act. Media sources and citizens for that matter can ask for information from the University and often do. I am not sure that a letter of reprimand in a personnel file can be requested. Maybe Rob or Jon knows. I tend to think it was more incompetence, although the University does have a reputation for keeping things under wraps.

I cannot imagine a trial in the Griesbaum cause. There is no reason for it. There is also no reason to appeal and get a bunch more negative publicity after a unanimous jury verdict.

 

[HawkPrdatr40]

The problem is that outsiders that haven't followed this case closely will see it for its conclusion - Iowa got its ass handed to it in the court of law by a former employee and was GUILTY of gender discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination, retaliation, equal pay violation and whistleblower violation.

There's no disputing that. It's the outcome of a trial. Iowa was found guilty of those very serious charges.

It doesn't matter how anyone views what they think should have happened in the case or for those that feel that the jury got it wrong. Perception on a broad scale nationally will be based on the result of the trial. Again, Iowa is guilty of gender discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination, retaliation, equal pay violation and whistleblower violation.

Read those charges again and put yourself in the position of someone that didn't follow the case or the story. It ain't good.

Now, if UI keeps Barta, they are keeping the guy ultimately responsible for these offenses. Then ask yourself, are you OK with others viewing your university as one that was guilty of those violations of the law AND kept the guy in charge?

Ding, Ding and ding.. and why I said in the other thread Barta time at Iowa is on the clock.. No way he survives this and if he does the University will look ridiculous for it..

 

[deanvogs]

Ding, Ding and ding.. and why I said in the other thread Barta time at Iowa is on the clock.. No way he survives this and if he does the University will look ridiculous for it..

Barta should not survive this and should be gone sooner than later. You can't be this freaking tone deaf to what you are perceived as and survive as a AD.

 

[tksirius]

Why isn't there a poll available in this thread?

 

[lightning1]

Somewhere I read that it is possible that nothing was documented by Gary Barta because of the Freedom of Information Act. Media sources and citizens for that matter can ask for information from the University and often do. I am not sure that a letter of reprimand in a personnel file can be requested. Maybe Rob or Jon knows. I tend to think it was more incompetence, although the University does have a reputation for keeping things under wraps.

I cannot imagine a trial in the Griesbaum cause. There is no reason for it. There is also no reason to appeal and get a bunch more negative publicity after a unanimous jury verdict.

Employment evaluation/discipline files are exempt, as far as I know. At least while the person was still employed. It's still not good to skirt the state FOI laws and I find it especially ridiculous that Barta and the other coaches would admit to doing just that. If it's worth it to the AD to avoid documentation in order to subvert the FOI requests, he/UofI legal should have never seen this end up in court. They should have settled.

 

[hawkeyemark]

Employment evaluation/discipline files are exempt, as far as I know. At least while the person was still employed. It's still not good to skirt the state FOI laws and I find it especially ridiculous that Barta and the other coaches would admit to doing just that. If it's worth it to the AD to avoid documentation in order to subvert the FOI requests, he/UofI legal should have never seen this end up in court. They should have settled.

Interesting that it took a disliked and probably undeserving plaintiff like Meyer to bring to light Barta's shortcomings and probably end his tenure at Iowa. At times the dysfunction in how we operate in athletics has seemed disheartening but if you love Iowa sports you just hang in and try not to get hung up over things which I find gets easier with older age. Life seems too short for that but now I feel a glimmer of hope that things will get better in my lifetime.

 

[tksirius]

 

[Duke]

1. Iowa never considered they could lose this case. Nice thinking.

2. The AG that tried this case is inferior by far to what Iowa could have received by outside counsel.

3. Poor jury selection in allowing a HUGE Iowa State fan on the jury. She became the Foreman. Is that cause for
appeal that she was posting during the trial?

4. Remember a while back when Gary Barta was a candidate to be AD at an ACC school?

5. The BOR is discussing Barta's future among themselves now.

6. Can we get Gene Taylor back from Kansas State?

7. Lesbians are a protected class, like it or not.

8. There should never have been a merger of the Men's and Women's Athletic Departments.