University of sketchy clinicians - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: University of sketchy clinicians (/thread-17723.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: University of sketchy clinicians (/thread-17723.html)
University of sketchy clinicians - BostonCard - 05-24-2019
Not a good luck for USC.
https://apple.news/AAxNoFzQdSeK8-GKxkHtDgw
Now, bad apples can happen anyways, but to quietly come to a deal with a predator is problematic, and this isn’t the first instance in UsC’s Case.
BC
RE: University of sketchy clinicians - oldalum - 05-24-2019
Love the new acronym!
Has only been a short time for University of Scandal and Corruption
RE: University of sketchy clinicians - Spiny_Norman - 05-24-2019
(05-24-2019, 11:36 AM)oldalum Wrote: Love the new acronym!
Has only been a short time for University of Scandal and Corruption
Note the first 2 letters of scandal . . .
RE: University of sketchy clinicians - martyup - 05-24-2019
It seems that this case is more an indictment of California labor law than bureaucratic malfeasance. It appears that USC really wanted to fire this guy, but didn't for legal reasons. His conduct was very creepy and inappropriate, but there don't appear to be allegations of sexual assault.
It should be easier to fire an employee who exhibits this type of behavior without risking brobdingnagian judgments in wrongful termination lawsuits.
RE: University of sketchy clinicians - BostonCard - 05-24-2019
I don’t think so. Unless he was tenured faculty, he would have been an at will employee, so he could have been fired for virtually any reason, or no reason at all (basically as long as it wasn’t his race, sex, or other protected characteristic), and in any case, the last thing a guy like that wants is a wrongful termination suit, as all the dirty laundry would have been aired. Even if they were worried about firing him, his privileges could have been rescinded (so he wouldn’t have been able to see patients), or a practice monitor could have been imposed. Moreover, he could have been reported to the California medical board, which could have issued disciplinary actions (https://search.dca.ca.gov/details/8002/G/57942/d1c4601855cd04cf49b52312dd94de68#pr). You can see what actions have been taken, but why weren’t they taken sooner?
Basically, this was USC not worried about getting hit with a wrongful termination suit, but SC worried that it’s reputation would have been sullied when people found out what happened. Turns out, though, that the LA times found out anyways, and their reputation is even more sullied than it would have been otherwise.
BC
RE: University of sketchy clinicians - 2006alum - 05-25-2019
Agree with BostonCard here - I don't see what California labor law (or any labor law, state or federal) had to do with it. Indeed, there was no mention of labor law anywhere in that article w/r/t USC's investigations, just USC's own internal policy rules. To me, the impression I came away with from the article was that everyone in a position of authority wanted to make the problem someone else's problem, and no one took responsibility despite literally decades of serious red flags.
RE: University of sketchy clinicians - oldalum - 05-25-2019
A second thought on the clever thread title:
As a bow to the current college generation, maybe we should modify it to "University of Sketch Clinicians"
RE: University of sketchy clinicians - martyup - 05-25-2019
It may have been that they were more worried about being embarrassed. I was reacting to the fact that they went to the extent of hiring another physician to shadow him whenever he treated patients. That was a brobdingnagian expense to incur just to avoid terminating him.