Dan Beebe
- 30-year career in athletics as Commissioner of the Big 12 and Ohio Valley Conferences and as an NCAA Director of Enforcement.
- Involved in investigations of some of the most prominent college sport infractions cases in NCAA history, including those at SMU, Oklahoma, Maryland, Kansas, Ole Miss, Houston and University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
- Managed playoff and bowl post-season football formats, negotiating major television and bowl game deals.
- As an offensive lineman, Beebe was a four-year starter and served as captain of the varsity football teams at Walla Walla (Wash.) Community College and Cal Poly-Pomona.
- All 7 Best Practices
- Pre-Meeting Discovery Process
- One-on-One Call with Expert
- Meeting Summary Report
- Post-Meeting Engagement
Workplace Misconduct Risk Management
Key Trends
- In today’s hyper-litigious society, employees can search the internet for “how to sue your employer” and find millions of resources.
Harassment, discrimination, retaliation and wrongful termination claims continue to plague employers at an alarming rate. Plaintiffs’ attorneys advertise for an opportunity to sue employers for alleged misconduct or unfair work practices. Mass advertising actually encourages employees to sue rather than give employers an opportunity to respond to real or alleged workplace misconduct.
- Social media and other electronic communications have increased the risks of misconduct that can affect the workplace and land employers in court.
Electronic communications like email, internet, text messaging and social media have significantly increased employer’s risk to claims of harassment, discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination and defamation. Social media is ubiquitous and all employers must account for its use by employees. Employers and employees can be confused about the freedom allowed in social media to express whatever someone thinks or does. What is placed in the social media world can negatively affect the workplace and cause the employer embarrassment or responsibility.
- Inconsistent management practices lower morale, create turnover and increase exposure to employment practices loss and litigation.
Just because someone is appointed to a supervisory position, it doesn’t mean they are prepared or skilled to manage people in an effective, equitable and legal manner. A lack of consistency in managing performance and determining discipline leads to discontent in the workplace and higher risk of litigation. High employee turnover is often also tied to “people problems”, such as interpersonal relationship conflicts in the workplace.
- Personnel policies often don’t fully protect employees from work-related misconduct and therefore increase the employer’s exposure to litigation and liability.
- Employers’ personnel policies are often considered confusing, contradictory, and pro-employer. Therefore, employees choose not to report alleged misconduct in-house, but instead seek recourse through the media or legal system.
- Updating personnel policies is a daunting task for employers, often pushed to the back burner.
- Employers’ personnel policies are often considered confusing, contradictory, and pro-employer. Therefore, employees choose not to report alleged misconduct in-house, but instead seek recourse through the media or legal system.
- Employers (particularly universities and sports organizations) are coming under increasingly intense media and legal scrutiny for misconduct cases.
Universities, colleges and athletics departments are being questioned by the media, governmental enforcement agencies and the courts to determine whether proper systems are in place to protect students from sexual misconduct or harassment, discrimination of various forms, or bullying.
- Universities and colleges continue to make mistakes in preventing and responding to sexual misconduct, harassment and discrimination on campus.
Universities and colleges are perceived to protect their high profile employees or athletes that are accused of misconduct at all costs. These institutions have difficulty demonstrating neutrality in responding to allegations that the institution allowed misconduct in the work or athletic environment, or didn’t investigate and adjudicate equitably.