Former Dolphins scout threatening to sue the team after contract not renewed | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Former Dolphins scout threatening to sue the team after contract not renewed

Daytona Fin

Daytona Fin

Queeks Draw
Club Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2002
Messages
42,328
Reaction score
44,963
Age
53
Location
Daytona Beach
A former Miami Dolphins scout has threatened a lawsuit against the franchise and the NFL alleging his recent dismissal violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.

FOX Sports 1 has learned that the attorney for Nate Sullivan sent an intent-to-initiate-litigation letter to the Dolphins and league. The document, which was obtained by FOX Sports 1 and sent via overnight mail Tuesday to the Dolphins and NFL, claims that Sullivan was terminated earlier this month because new Miami general manager Dennis Hickey was unhappy about his remote working status.

A 17-year Dolphins scout, Sullivan began working from home in 2004 to better assist in medical treatment for his wife, JoAnne. She suffers from cystic fibrosis — a potentially fatal lung disease — as well as a debilitating blood vessel ailment (polyarteritis nodosa).
Click to expand...
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/...g-from-home-052814?cmpid=tsmtw:fscom:nflonfox

Harr told FOX Sports 1 that Sullivan is seeking his former job back "with full healthcare benefits that continue to cover the illnesses his wife is stricken with."

"Our hope is they change their mind and reinstate Mr. Sullivan," said Harr, who is prepared to seek damages otherwise.

The intent-to-initiate-litigation letter states the NFL is also listed as a potential defendant because the league has "not officially disciplined nor taken steps to eliminate the systemic discriminatory practices by the Miami Dolphins, LTD." The letter cites the "ignorant and inappropriate homosexual comments" directed at former Dolphins offensive lineman Jonathan Martin as part of the Richie Incognito bullying scandal as well as recent homophobic tweets by Miami defensive back Don Jones about St. Louis Rams defensive end Michael Sam.

"This (NFL) inaction only serves to foster these illegal practices," the letter states. "The National Football League has failed to ensure a working environment within (the Dolphins) which eliminates discrimination in all its reprehensible forms."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If it really happened this way then that is pathetic. He was allowed to do it under 3 other GMs but Hickey doesn't like it??!! Totally absurd
 
guy gets fired by the new gm, gets buthurt. Who would have guessed?

If Hickey wants certain things from his scouts he should be allowed it, if he fails with picks its on his head not Ireland or Spielmans.
 
I'm not sure I see the law suit here? If an employer allows an employee to work from home, for what ever reason, but later decides that job needs to be done in office than that should be within the companies rights.
 
More likely hes a crappy scout...............
 
If that's the true reason then it's pretty reprehensible. However if his scouting work output was to the detriment of the team where he essentially went through the motions civil service-style with a sense of entitlement that he was Teflon due to his wife, then I can't blame a new GM with his back to the wall on a do or die short leash for demanding the best support group possible.
 
So next can a coach just coach from home because of an illness in the family and be immune from being fired if the team feels it's impacting his performance?
 
All Hickey has to do is walk into court and show Miami's recent draft history and the case would be tossed out. What ever the scouts were doing in the past wasn't working and that could include letting some work from home. Is this the same scout that said "Pat White looks like a second round pick to me."
 
Did you people even READ the link?

The intent-to-initiate-litigation letter also states the Dolphins began excluding cystic fibrosis medications from their health care when revamping their insurance offerings in April. Harr told FOX Sports 1 that the cost of one prescription skyrocketed from $10 to $3,000 per pill under the new policy.
Click to expand...

And as for this
According to the guidelines, it looks like ADA protection only applies if the person who is employed is disabled. Maybe someone who knows more can chime in.
Click to expand...
Again, the author did you the service of giving you the exact statute they are using. Would it kill people to READ A GODDAMN ONE PAGE ARTICLE BEFORE JUMPING TO MEGA CONCLUSIONS?

Sullivan's attorney, Jason L. Harr, contends that reasoning would violate Title 29 of the Americans With Disabilities Act that states "it is unlawful for a covered entity to exclude or deny equal jobs or benefits to, or otherwise discriminate against, a qualified individual because of the known disability of an individual with whom the qualified individual is known to have a family, business, social or other relationship or association."
Click to expand...

They were starting to pull benefits specifically related to the illness this man's wife from suffering from (allegedly, important to note!) and if found to be true, then this absolutely violates the ADA.

I mean, sweet christ, even YOUR VERY LINK HAS A Q&A AT THE BOTTOM WITH THIS VERY QUESTION
Q. I think I was discriminated against because my wife is disabled. Can I file a charge with the EEOC?
A. Yes. The ADA makes it unlawful to discriminate against an individual, whether disabled or not, because of a relationship or association with an individual with a known disability.
Click to expand...


Am I saying he is 100% correct in his allegations? Absolutely not. But my god people how is this considered a discussion board when you won't even put in the time to read what is being discussed? That's like breaking down gamefilm with a broken tv. Please please PLEASE put some effort into this board.
 
Come on CanDolphin, since when did facts and correct info become part of the criteria. If we only rambled about things we knew what the heck we were rambling about it wouldn't be any fun. Ramble on nation! Ramble on!
 
I want to hear the Fins side to this story. If they fired him for merit…too bad.
 
CANDolphan said:
Did you people even READ the link?



And as for this

Again, the author did you the service of giving you the exact statute they are using. Would it kill people to READ A GODDAMN ONE PAGE ARTICLE BEFORE JUMPING TO MEGA CONCLUSIONS?



They were starting to pull benefits specifically related to the illness this man's wife from suffering from (allegedly, important to note!) and if found to be true, then this absolutely violates the ADA.

I mean, sweet christ, even YOUR VERY LINK HAS A Q&A AT THE BOTTOM WITH THIS VERY QUESTION


Am I saying he is 100% correct in his allegations? Absolutely not. But my god people how is this considered a discussion board when you won't even put in the time to read what is being discussed? That's like breaking down gamefilm with a broken tv. Please please PLEASE put some effort into this board.[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

To my knowledge, they have every right to pull benefits as they see fit as long as it is done across the board regardless of whether it affects one entity more than another. The attorney would have to prove his client was targeted because of his wife's disability which is practically, although not entirely, impossible. I am not sure how the staff is insured, whether it is commercial or self insurance (most likely) would certainly matter as well. Ultimately, they will likely settle to get rid of the issue.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
 
How in the **** can you be a "scout" while being planted at home? Look up the definition of the word. That would like a truck driver demanding he be allowed to work from home....
 
I put my money on this being a line of BS to cover the fact he was fired for being a crappy scout...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom