I keep being told by the “damn Pitino” crowd that he violated his contract at the time of dismissal, specifically, the language in 6.1.3. In this thread, I attempt to address that language directly as well as Pitino’s and presumably his attorney’s viewpoints with respect to 6.1.3. I did find something a little interesting that I don’t recall hearing before.
Below is the language in Pitino's final contract under Section 6 for a with-cause firing. There are additional elements (6.2 thru 6.5) under which Pitino could have been terminated with cause. Those related to Pitino’s disability, due process and procedure.
6. TERMINATION FOR JUST CAUSE.
6.1 Employer has the right to terminate this Employment Contract for Just Cause or impose other appropriate discipline, in which case prior to such action, Employee shall be given ten (10) days' prior written notice and an opportunity to be heard. The term "Just Cause" with respect to Employer's right to terminate this Employment Contract shall be understood to include all of the following:
6.1.1 A material violation of this Employment Contract or refusal or unwillingness to perform this Contract in good faith and to the best of Employee's abilities;
6.1.2 Disparaging media publicity of a material nature that damages the good name and reputation of Employer or the University, if such publicity is caused by Employee's willful misconduct that could objectively be anticipated to bring Employee into public disrepute or scandal, or which tends to greatly offend the public, or any class thereof on the basis of invidious distinction;
6.1.3 Major violation of any rule, or bylaw of Employer, the athletic conference with which the University is then affiliated or the NCAA, including Level I and/or Level II NCAA violations, which violation damages Employer or the University in a material fashion; and
6.1.4 Employee's (a) dishonesty with Employer or University, (b) acts of moral depravity, (c) conviction of a felony or employment- or drug-related misdemeanor, or (d) intoxication or being under the influence of a psychoactive substance when performing duties under this Contract, when student athletes are present, when attending scheduled public events or appearances, or during media contacts.
LINK
Before focusing on 6.1.3, I want to show the same section (#6) for his PRIOR contract. This contract was in force during the stripper-gate scandal.
6. TERMINATION FOR JUST CAUSE.
6.1 Employer has the right to terminate this Employment Contract for Just Cause or impose other appropriate discipline, in which case prior to such action, Employee shall be given ten 10 (ten) days' prior written notice and an opportunity to be heard. The term "Just Cause" with respect to Employer's right to terminate this Employment Contract shall be understood to include all of the following:
6.1.1 A material violation of this Employment Contract or refusal or unwillingness to perform this Contract in good faith and to the best of Employee's abilities;
6.1.2 Disparaging media publicity of a material nature that damages the good name and reputation of Employer or the University, if such publicity is caused by Employee's willful misconduct that could objectively be anticipated to bring Employee into public disrepute or scandal, or which tends to greatly offend the public, or any class thereof on the basis of invidious distinction;
6.1.3 Major violation of any rule, or bylaw of Employer, the athletic conference with which the University is then affiliated or the NCAA, which violation damages Employer or the University in a material fashion, including in the case of NCAA, significant or repetitive violations as set forth in NCAA Bylaw 11.2.1, but with the understanding that Employee shall not be responsible for misconduct of third parties, assistants, or other representatives of the athletic interest of Employer and University, unless Employee was aware of such misconduct and failed to promptly report it to Employer or Employee failed to exercise diligent, careful supervision of the assistants, or other representatives of the athletic interests of Employer and the University which could have disclosed the violation; and
6.1.4 Employee's (a) dishonesty with Employer or University, (b) acts of moral depravity, (c) conviction of a felony or employment- or drug-related misdemeanor, or (d) intoxication or being under the influence of a psychoactive substance when performing duties under this Contract, when student athletes are present. when attending scheduled public events or appearances, or during media contacts.
LINK
Note that 6.1.3 changed significantly between the two contracts; the other provisions under 6.1 were identical. Subsection 6.2 on Pitino’s disability also changed significantly, but that language isn’t germane to the lawsuit.
What changed in essence was that explicit exemption for the misconduct of Pitino’s subordinates/assistants was removed from his final contract. Not coincidentally, that was a central issue with stripper-gate, McGee’s responsibility and Pitino’s claim not to know. And an answer to the “why change” question is obvious. Management undoubtedly did not like that Pitino’s contract in force gave him an unambiguous release from responsibility for stripper-gate and any other clandestine activity by his staff that he didn’t know about...
(Continued)
Below is the language in Pitino's final contract under Section 6 for a with-cause firing. There are additional elements (6.2 thru 6.5) under which Pitino could have been terminated with cause. Those related to Pitino’s disability, due process and procedure.
6. TERMINATION FOR JUST CAUSE.
6.1 Employer has the right to terminate this Employment Contract for Just Cause or impose other appropriate discipline, in which case prior to such action, Employee shall be given ten (10) days' prior written notice and an opportunity to be heard. The term "Just Cause" with respect to Employer's right to terminate this Employment Contract shall be understood to include all of the following:
6.1.1 A material violation of this Employment Contract or refusal or unwillingness to perform this Contract in good faith and to the best of Employee's abilities;
6.1.2 Disparaging media publicity of a material nature that damages the good name and reputation of Employer or the University, if such publicity is caused by Employee's willful misconduct that could objectively be anticipated to bring Employee into public disrepute or scandal, or which tends to greatly offend the public, or any class thereof on the basis of invidious distinction;
6.1.3 Major violation of any rule, or bylaw of Employer, the athletic conference with which the University is then affiliated or the NCAA, including Level I and/or Level II NCAA violations, which violation damages Employer or the University in a material fashion; and
6.1.4 Employee's (a) dishonesty with Employer or University, (b) acts of moral depravity, (c) conviction of a felony or employment- or drug-related misdemeanor, or (d) intoxication or being under the influence of a psychoactive substance when performing duties under this Contract, when student athletes are present, when attending scheduled public events or appearances, or during media contacts.
LINK
Before focusing on 6.1.3, I want to show the same section (#6) for his PRIOR contract. This contract was in force during the stripper-gate scandal.
6. TERMINATION FOR JUST CAUSE.
6.1 Employer has the right to terminate this Employment Contract for Just Cause or impose other appropriate discipline, in which case prior to such action, Employee shall be given ten 10 (ten) days' prior written notice and an opportunity to be heard. The term "Just Cause" with respect to Employer's right to terminate this Employment Contract shall be understood to include all of the following:
6.1.1 A material violation of this Employment Contract or refusal or unwillingness to perform this Contract in good faith and to the best of Employee's abilities;
6.1.2 Disparaging media publicity of a material nature that damages the good name and reputation of Employer or the University, if such publicity is caused by Employee's willful misconduct that could objectively be anticipated to bring Employee into public disrepute or scandal, or which tends to greatly offend the public, or any class thereof on the basis of invidious distinction;
6.1.3 Major violation of any rule, or bylaw of Employer, the athletic conference with which the University is then affiliated or the NCAA, which violation damages Employer or the University in a material fashion, including in the case of NCAA, significant or repetitive violations as set forth in NCAA Bylaw 11.2.1, but with the understanding that Employee shall not be responsible for misconduct of third parties, assistants, or other representatives of the athletic interest of Employer and University, unless Employee was aware of such misconduct and failed to promptly report it to Employer or Employee failed to exercise diligent, careful supervision of the assistants, or other representatives of the athletic interests of Employer and the University which could have disclosed the violation; and
6.1.4 Employee's (a) dishonesty with Employer or University, (b) acts of moral depravity, (c) conviction of a felony or employment- or drug-related misdemeanor, or (d) intoxication or being under the influence of a psychoactive substance when performing duties under this Contract, when student athletes are present. when attending scheduled public events or appearances, or during media contacts.
LINK
Note that 6.1.3 changed significantly between the two contracts; the other provisions under 6.1 were identical. Subsection 6.2 on Pitino’s disability also changed significantly, but that language isn’t germane to the lawsuit.
What changed in essence was that explicit exemption for the misconduct of Pitino’s subordinates/assistants was removed from his final contract. Not coincidentally, that was a central issue with stripper-gate, McGee’s responsibility and Pitino’s claim not to know. And an answer to the “why change” question is obvious. Management undoubtedly did not like that Pitino’s contract in force gave him an unambiguous release from responsibility for stripper-gate and any other clandestine activity by his staff that he didn’t know about...
(Continued)
