Employee Alleged Harassment Case - Chad Kelly

[ArgoRavi]

Well it's interesting that in the Argo's statement of defence claim they mention that management advised her last Fall that she would have to improve her skills to maintain her position on the team. You have to wonder if she didn't bother to do this and then decided to file suit and claim harassment when her contract wasn't renewed. Also think it's interesting that Argo management told her she shouldn't have met with Kelly if she had an issue and should have advised management if there was a problem. I can understand why the Argos didn't settle with her because it doesn't sound like she has much of a case.

Allegedly, they did so after the big blowup with Kelly during the week of the East Final, which was supposedly witnessed by others. I think that how this all turns out may be dependent on if these witnesses corroborate the coach's version of events.

[bluto]

Well it's interesting that in the Argo's statement of defence claim they mention that management advised her last Fall that she would have to improve her skills to maintain her position on the team. You have to wonder if she didn't bother to do this and then decided to file suit and claim harassment when her contract wasn't renewed. Also think it's interesting that Argo management told her she shouldn't have met with Kelly if she had an issue and should have advised management if there was a problem. I can understand why the Argos didn't settle with her because it doesn't sound like she has much of a case.

Or at least, they haven't yet.

Both sides have now marked out their battle lines, I'd expect this to get mediated out.

[Will]

The question I have after reading Naylor's article is that the plaintiff had been employed by the team on a series of 1-year contracts since prior to the pandemic. Why were here skills, all of a sudden, not good enough? There are plenty of possible answers here, but I don't quite buy that explanation fully given the timing.

[Will]

Or at least, they haven't yet.

Both sides have now marked out their battle lines, I'd expect this to get mediated out.

I envision it going down this route as well.

[AngeloV]

The question I have after reading Naylor's article is that the plaintiff had been employed by the team on a series of 1-year contracts since prior to the pandemic. Why were here skills, all of a sudden, not good enough? There are plenty of possible answers here, but I don't quite buy that explanation fully given the timing.

It is possible that some players didn't believe she was good at her job. With the player turnover year after year, there may be new voices that get heard.

[paulwoods13]

The question I have after reading Naylor's article is that the plaintiff had been employed by the team on a series of 1-year contracts since prior to the pandemic. Why were here skills, all of a sudden, not good enough? There are plenty of possible answers here, but I don't quite buy that explanation fully given the timing.

I have no idea what happened in this particular case. But an employee, either contract or permanent, being deemed inadequate after previously being deemed adequate is not unusual in any workplace IMO. Circumstances change, operational needs change, and individuals change.

[AngeloV]

I have no idea what happened in this particular case. But an employee, either contract or permanent, being deemed inadequate after previously being deemed adequate is not unusual in any workplace IMO. Circumstances change, operational needs change, and individuals change.

Perhaps they decided they wanted to expand the role, and she needed to improve at certain aspects to match the new requirements. Like you, I have no idea but, I can't see the head therapist lying about this. I am just not willing to accept the charges against Kelly and the Argos at this point.

[kellynjk]

I have no idea what happened in this particular case. But an employee, either contract or permanent, being deemed inadequate after previously being deemed adequate is not unusual in any workplace IMO. Circumstances change, operational needs change, and individuals change.

Yeah I totally agree with this, especially as she was a "strength and conditioning coach" and maybe the needs and requirements of some team members was also changing over time. Almost any profession you can think of (doctors, teachers etc) requires that their members do "quality assurance training" every few years to ensure that they are up to date on current practices etc. And one would think that this would be even more important for someone who has a job dealing with athletes who may be coming off of injuries etc. I think AngeloV is right, that alot will depend on if there are witnesses to some of these conversations and/or encounters.

Also if the Argos were going to go the route of mediation, wouldn't they have done it by now? Or could it be that they have suggested this route, but the plaintiff hasn't been open to it?

[Argo57]

Perhaps they decided they wanted to expand the role, and she needed to improve at certain aspects to match the new requirements. Like you, I have no idea but, I can't see the head therapist lying about this. I am just not willing to accept the charges against Kelly and the Argos at this point.

One would also assume her immediate supervisor has documented any performance review and filed it with HR which would validate where and when this particular conversation took place.

["Issues"Mcgee]

I have no idea what happened in this particular case. But an employee, either contract or permanent, being deemed inadequate after previously being deemed adequate is not unusual in any workplace IMO. Circumstances change, operational needs change, and individuals change.

Agreed. That's kind of the whole idea behind one-year contracts.