Ron Franklin suing ESPN

[BeasFan 3]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110120/ap_on_sp_co_ne/fbc_espn_announcer

Highlights:

Former ESPN announcer sues network over firing

AUSTIN, Texas – Former ESPN announcer Ron Franklin has sued the network over his firing for reportedly berating a female colleague.

The wrongful termination lawsuit filed Monday in state district court in Franklin's hometown of Austin claims ESPN had no grounds for dismissing him. The suit says Franklin exchanged "contentious words" with a colleague who repeatedly interrupted a private conversation before the pair worked at the Chick-fil-A Bowl without incident.

Sideline reporter Jeannine Edwards has said Franklin called her "sweet baby" in a condescending tone. When she objected, he used a derogatory term. Edwards said a colleague reported the incident to ESPN officials.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages and other fees, but not reinstatement. An attorney for Franklin didn't immediately return a phone call seeking comment.

<< more >>

[tiger88 934]

Any of our resident lawyers have an opinion? Seems like a lame argument about a private conversation when it took place in a conference room type setting.

[Mikey 16,781]

Any of our resident lawyers have an opinion? Seems like a lame argument about a private conversation when it took place in a conference room type setting.

I'm a long way from being a lawyer and am now retired but: I would have been in some deep stuff at my last job had I called a female fellow employee "Sweet Baby" and she took exception to it. Maybe not fired the first time, but I'd have had one foot on a banana peel and the other in the unemployment line for a couple of years. One more slip after something like that and it would have been curtains.

The federal laws regarding such are very clear and the burden is on the employer to prevent such things. If ESPN didn't fire Franklin, or at least impose some serious suspension without pay punishment on him, she could get ESPN in much bigger legal trouble than Franklin ever thought about causing.

[tiger88 934]

Yeah, my unlawyerly educated guess tells me his lawyer is one of the few telling him he has a case, or maybe he's just dead set on suing.

[TitanTiger 21,238]

Some of this is just for show. If he doesn't fight it, it makes it look as if he agrees with their assessment. If he does, even if he pretty much knows he'll lose, it at least says to other potential employers that he's not agreeing with ESPN's assessment. It's weird, but that perception may actually help him land something else more than falling on the sword.

[AUloggerhead 2,516]

I don't know -- Franklin's remarks were condescending & rude, no doubt. But, firing him over it? It's not like he voiced his opinion over the air. I thought ESPN's knee-jerk reaction in firing him so quickly trivializes real cases of sexual harrassmennt. I'm not a lawyer either but I suspect Franklin will get some kind of settlement out of this.

[WinCrimson 61]

Yeah, my unlawyerly educated guess tells me his lawyer is one of the few telling him he has a case, or maybe he's just dead set on suing.

You meant "uneducated" guess.

Or, you should have.

[tiger88 934]

Yeah, my unlawyerly educated guess tells me his lawyer is one of the few telling him he has a case, or maybe he's just dead set on suing.

You meant "uneducated" guess.

Or, you should have.

I was an intentional misplay using self deprecation. I wouldn't expect a "know it all" turd like you to figure that out. See boy? Unlawyerly educated, as in, not lawyerly educated.

Now run along and try to find another false victory to impress yourself you little douche bag.

[aucanucktiger 1,889]

maybe Franklin doesn't agree w/ that version of the conversation. in any event, if other ESPN employees have chronically made rude comments w/out being fired, ESPN better buckle up

[WinCrimson 61]

Yeah, my unlawyerly educated guess tells me his lawyer is one of the few telling him he has a case, or maybe he's just dead set on suing.

You meant "uneducated" guess.

Or, you should have.

I was an intentional misplay using self deprecation. I wouldn't expect a "know it all" turd like you to figure that out. See boy? Unlawyerly educated, as in, not lawyerly educated.

Now run along and try to find another false victory to impress yourself you little douche bag.

Just because I didn't laugh doesn't mean I didn't get it.

Go play in the street.

[tiger88 934]

Yeah, my unlawyerly educated guess tells me his lawyer is one of the few telling him he has a case, or maybe he's just dead set on suing.

You meant "uneducated" guess.

Or, you should have.

I was an intentional misplay using self deprecation. I wouldn't expect a "know it all" turd like you to figure that out. See boy? Unlawyerly educated, as in, not lawyerly educated.

Now run along and try to find another false victory to impress yourself you little douche bag.

Just because I didn't laugh doesn't mean I didn't get it.

Go play in the street.

You didn't get it or you wouldn't have posted what you did. Everyone sees that. Go swim in your cesspool, turd.

[Mikey 16,781]

maybe Franklin doesn't agree w/ that version of the conversation. in any event, if other ESPN employees have chronically made rude comments w/out being fired, ESPN better buckle up

There's not a whole lot I know about, but this one area is something I do know about. Had ESPN NOT done something about Franklin, that's when they'd have to buckle up. She is holding all the cards, like it or not.

The burden is on ESPN to provide a workplace environment free from sexual harassment in all it's forms. If there is a cover girl calendar in the garage with pictures of semi-nude girls, all it takes is one complaint and they have a serious problem.

It doesn't sound fair, but like beauty, harassment is in the eye of the beholder. The federal government has some really aggressive people that investigate and prosecute these cases. You don't want to get them involved.

[AUloggerhead 2,516]

maybe Franklin doesn't agree w/ that version of the conversation. in any event, if other ESPN employees have chronically made rude comments w/out being fired, ESPN better buckle up

There's not a whole lot I know about, but this one area is something I do know about. Had ESPN NOT done something about Franklin, that's when they'd have to buckle up. She is holding all the cards, like it or not.

The burden is on ESPN to provide a workplace environment free from sexual harassment in all it's forms. If there is a cover girl calendar in the garage with pictures of semi-nude girls, all it takes is one complaint and they have a serious problem.

It doesn't sound fair, but like beauty, harassment is in the eye of the beholder. The federal government has some really aggressive people that investigate and prosecute these cases. You don't want to get them involved.

Firing him was way overboard, IMHO. You fire someone for makiing lewd gestures or advances (or in Brett Favre's case, sending photos of body parts to a co-worker's phone.) Can you see Franklin getting fired for calling a male co-worker "sweet cheeks" or "a-hole?" No. It'd be ridiculous. ESPN bypassed a perfect opportunity to issue a reprimand or suspension as an appropriate punishment and went straight to the nuclear option. Didn't Franklin work a bowl game right after this incident and was only fired later? No one complained of his broadcasting job at the bowl game. I think he'll get a settlement.

[Mikey 16,781]

This isn't Francklin's first trip across thin ice in this department, is it? I don't particularly like the way these laws are currently being interpreted, but my likes, IMHOs from different people and so forth do not matter. What matters is what employers are dealing with today and how they have to handle it. Suspension without pay may have got them off the hook, maybe not.

Without knowing details, history and so forth we can't say. It appears they chose to err on the side of caution. I only wish they would follow the "err on the side of caution" with their reporting and not conduct groundless smear campaigns.

[BeasFan 3]

This isn't Francklin's first trip across thin ice in this department, is it? I don't particularly like the way these laws are currently being interpreted, but my likes, IMHOs from different people and so forth do not matter. What matters is what employers are dealing with today and how they have to handle it. Suspension without pay may have got them off the hook, maybe not.

Without knowing details, history and so forth we can't say. It appears they chose to err on the side of caution. I only wish they would follow the "err on the side of caution" with their reporting and not conduct groundless smear campaigns.

Well said! The yo-yo activity on integrity, truth, opinion, interpretations and many other topics continues to blow my mind. I have determined that if I limit my exposure to ESPN to the video portion of football games that my blood pressure and the safety of objects in my living room is much better.

They seem to exemplify the True Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules.

[OKieAuburnDoug 1]

:roflol:Fire Franklin over this after hiring Knight...

[Auburnfan91 1,408]

Didn't Tony Kornheiser get suspended a few months ago for talking about a female SportsCenter anchor?

I think ESPN went overboard. I'm not saying what Franklin did was right but I don't think it was bad enough to fire him over it. Also from looking at both sides it seems like she instegated the whole thing. I agree with what AULoggerhead said if it was a male co-worker then Franklin probably wouldn't have been fired.