1 of 1- alz
- Larry Walker
Offline - Registered: 9/23/2010
- Posts: 2,396
Sark suing USC.
On the one hand, this is ludicrous to me. Disease or not, Sark embarrassed the university with his conduct, and failed to live up to the requirements of the position.
On the other hand... California law does characterize Alcoholism as a disease.... That's no good at all for them, he might just win that lawsuit.
On the other hand again. It's USC, so I hope they lose money.
- artie_fufkin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: God's Little Acre
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 22,429
Re: Sark suing USC.
Love that Haden fired him via email. Stay classy, SC.
- forsberg_us
- Administrator
Offline
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 9,944
Re: Sark suing USC.
Alcoholism is considered a disease under both federal and California law. However, the law doesn't protect the alcoholic if his drinking affects his job performance and/or if he shows up at work under the influence of alcohol.
It's been a while, but didn't Sarkisian have an incident in which he appeared drunk in front of a group of boosters and then a second incident when he came to practice drunk after a loss? If that's true, his alcoholism shouldn't/won't protect him.
- alz
- Larry Walker
Offline
- Registered: 9/23/2010
- Posts: 2,396
Re: Sark suing USC.
forsberg_us wrote:
Alcoholism is considered a disease under both federal and California law. However, the law doesn't protect the alcoholic if his drinking affects his job performance and/or if he shows up at work under the influence of alcohol.
It's been a while, but didn't Sarkisian have an incident in which he appeared drunk in front of a group of boosters and then a second incident when he came to practice drunk after a loss? If that's true, his alcoholism shouldn't/won't protect him.
I think that must be a letter in the law because his attorney was quick to note that he had two such episodes, and offered the excuses behind them. Episode One "A result of 2 beers mixing badly with Sark's anti-anxiety medication." Episode Two "A result from drinking the night before and a night with very little sleep."
- •
Thread Starter- forsberg_us
- Administrator
Offline
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 9,944
Re: Sark suing USC.
From the EEOC's FAQ on the Americans with Disabilities Act
Q. Are alcoholics covered by the ADA?
A. Yes. While a current illegal user of drugs is not protected by the ADA if an employer acts on the basis of such use, a person who currently uses alcohol is not automatically denied protection. An alcoholic is a person with a disability and is protected by the ADA if s/he is qualified to perform the essential functions of the job. An employer may be required to provide an accommodation to an alcoholic. However, an employer can discipline, discharge or deny employment to an alcoholic whose use of alcohol adversely affects job performance or conduct. An employer also may prohibit the use of alcohol in the workplace and can require that employees not be under the influence of alcohol.
- artie_fufkin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: God's Little Acre
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 22,429
Re: Sark suing USC.
There were two instances, the dinner with the boosters before the season started, and then when he showed up to work under the influence.