News: PFT: Marriott: NFL interviewed employee, reviewed video in Michael Irvin case

[Reality]

It’s difficult proving guilt. Guilt of what ? Inappropriate behavior is a vague description. Companies have to rule all the time on inappropriate behavior which isn’t illegal only breaching company policies.

Everyone can interpret inappropriate behavior differently based on their own experiences , history and sensitivity.

Marriott was reacting to their employees complaint which doesn’t necessarily translate to any legal guilt with Irvin. And if the NFL Network doesn’t bench Irvin then this might not have even become public .

And not sure if Marriott would hold any liability for simply moving him to another hotel instead of kicking him to the curb. It’s becoming more apparent Irvin’s beef is ultimately going to reside with the NFL whose Personal Conduct Policy may apply .

In the end the NFL Network is a body of the NFL and public perception in the broadcasting segment is paramount. If they felt with Irvin’s history this incident regardless how serious was a potential distraction to their SB coverage they would certainly appear to hold the authority to suspend his services.

Irvin’s case appears to be weak IMO , only a reactionary attempt to save his image, and if he pursues his lawsuit against the NFLN we will probably never see him on major Sports Networks again.

The legal liability comes into play because they proactively contacted the NFL.

If they had just evicted Irvin from the premises and that was it, it would be hard to hold them accountable.

The bottom line though is if Marriott does not use their connections to contact the NFL, this would have likely not made the news.

Again, I am not pro-Irvin or anti-Irvin as I just want to know the truth of what happened.

Assuming everything happened the way the employee said it did, then Marriott will probably escape any liability.

However, if it comes out that she fabricated any aspects of her claim, then Marriott will be the main cause of damage to Irvin's reputation and possibly his media career.

 

[sacase]

It’s difficult proving guilt. Guilt of what ? Inappropriate behavior is a vague description. Companies have to rule all the time on inappropriate behavior which isn’t illegal only breaching company policies.

Everyone can interpret inappropriate behavior differently based on their own experiences , history and sensitivity.

Marriott was reacting to their employees complaint which doesn’t necessarily translate to any legal guilt with Irvin. And if the NFL Network doesn’t bench Irvin then this might not have even become public .

And not sure if Marriott would hold any liability for simply moving him to another hotel instead of kicking him to the curb. It’s becoming more apparent Irvin’s beef is ultimately going to reside with the NFL whose Personal Conduct Policy may apply .

In the end the NFL Network is a body of the NFL and public perception in the broadcasting segment is paramount. If they felt with Irvin’s history this incident regardless how serious was a potential distraction to their SB coverage they would certainly appear to hold the authority to suspend his services.

Irvin’s case appears to be weak IMO , only a reactionary attempt to save his image, and if he pursues his lawsuit against the NFLN we will probably never see him on major Sports Networks again.

Which his why there are two complaints, slander and interference in a business relationship. There is a contract between Irvin and the NFL. He is not a direct employee of the NFL. He has a similar contract with ESPN. Marriott has interfered in that relationship. Marriott might get off on the slander piece but they have to throw their employee under the bus.

 

[Diehardblues]

The legal liability comes into play because they proactively contacted the NFL.

If they had just evicted Irvin from the premises and that was it, it would be hard to hold them accountable.

The bottom line though is if Marriott does not use their connections to contact the NFL, this would have likely not made the news.

Again, I am not pro-Irvin or anti-Irvin as I just want to know the truth of what happened.

Assuming everything happened the way the employee said it did, then Marriott will probably escape any liability.

However, if it comes out that she fabricated any aspects of her claim, then Marriott will be the main cause of damage to Irvin's reputation and possibly his media career.

Yep.

The aspects of her claim of course are still undisclosed . The Marriott and the NFL based their decisions on the content of her claims .

Unless she changes her claims going to be difficult to prove they were false or fabricated. It all goes back to her interpretations of what she deems as inappropriate.

The Marriott and NFL made their decisions as such. Irvin has to realize his history played into the decisions and probably the employees take on Irvin’s conduct.

And Irvin probably knew any new complaints on him as such would end his career with NFLN.

 

[Diehardblues]

Which his why there are two complaints, slander and interference in a business relationship. There is a contract between Irvin and the NFL. He is not a direct employee of the NFL. He has a similar contract with ESPN. Marriott has interfered in that relationship. Marriott might get off on the slander piece but they have to throw their employee under the bus.

Surely the NFLN after Irvin was dismissed by ESPN had an agreement or understanding that any new complaints on him would result in suspension or termination.

 

[Reality]

The aspects of her claim of course are still undisclosed . The Marriott and the NFL based their decisions on the content of her claims .

Unless she changes her claims going to be difficult to prove they were false or fabricated. It all goes back to her interpretations of what she deems as inappropriate.

The Marriott and NFL made their decisions as such. Irvin has to realize his history played into the decisions and probably the employees take on Irvin’s conduct.

And Irvin probably knew any new complaints on him as such would end his career with NFLN.

Her claims actually were disclosed in a filing by Marriott. There may be more to them, but they clearly defined the claims she made.

The problem is that disclosure of that information does not remove legal liability from Marriott and the NFL.

If it were to turn out she lied or fabricated part or all of her claims (not saying that is the case of course), then Marriott and the NFL would still have publicly negatively impacted Irvin's reputation and career.

Marriott and the NFL could seek legal recource against the employee, but that would likely have to be settled after the Irvin lawsuit is resolved.

Marriott should have evicted Irvin and then advised the employee to file a criminal complaint.

Instead, they took it upon themselves to contact the NFL. At that moment, they inserted themselves into legal liability based on the validity of the employee's claim and by proxy now "their" claim.

The NFL likely overstepped as well, but if a major sponsor contacts you and tells you that they have evidence of an employee sexually harassing someone, the NFL would be hard-pressed to ignore it especially given the recent climate of not listening to victims of sexual harassment.

As I said in an earlier post, unless a court (criminal or civil) rules that Irvin did what the employee said (aka: guilty), then Marriott will retain legal liability for any and all negative impact the claims and subsequent actions taken against Irvin have inflicted on him.

It will be hard to prove either way who is right or wrong, but I have to believe at some point a judge is going to ask, "Why did you (Marriott) take it upon yourself to contact the NFL?" and Marriott better have a really good answer for that question.

 

[MarcusRock]

Her claims actually were disclosed in a filing by Marriott. There may be more to them, but they clearly defined the claims she made.

The problem is that disclosure of that information does not remove legal liability from Marriott and the NFL.

If it were to turn out she lied or fabricated part or all of her claims (not saying that is the case of course), then Marriott and the NFL would still have publicly negatively impacted Irvin's reputation and career.

Marriott and the NFL could seek legal recource against the employee, but that would likely have to be settled after the Irvin lawsuit is resolved.

Marriott should have evicted Irvin and then advised the employee to file a criminal complaint.

Instead, they took it upon themselves to contact the NFL. At that moment, they inserted themselves into legal liability based on the validity of the employee's claim and by proxy, now "their" claim.

The NFL likely overstepped as well, but if a major sponsor contacts you and tells you that they have evidence of an employee sexually harassing someone, the NFL would be hard-pressed to ignore it especially given the recent climate of not listening to victims of sexual harassment.

As I said in an earlier post, unless a court (criminal or civil) rules that Irvin did what the employee said (aka: guilty), then Marriott will retain legal liability for any and all negative impact the claims and subsequent actions taken against Irvin have inflicted on him.

It will be hard to prove either way who is right or wrong, but I have to believe at some point a judge is going to ask, "Why did you (Marriott) take it upon yourself to contact the NFL?" and Marriott better have a really good answer for that question.[/B]

Marriott kinda already answered that question in their latest filing. They said the NFL, who booked the rooms, told them to let them know if there was a problem with one of their guests. Whether that's documented somewhere in writing would be the obvious question.

 

[Diehardblues]

Her claims actually were disclosed in a filing by Marriott. There may be more to them, but they clearly defined the claims she made.

The problem is that disclosure of that information does not remove legal liability from Marriott and the NFL.

If it were to turn out she lied or fabricated part or all of her claims (not saying that is the case of course), then Marriott and the NFL would still have publicly negatively impacted Irvin's reputation and career.

Marriott and the NFL could seek legal recource against the employee, but that would likely have to be settled after the Irvin lawsuit is resolved.

Marriott should have evicted Irvin and then advised the employee to file a criminal complaint.

Instead, they took it upon themselves to contact the NFL. At that moment, they inserted themselves into legal liability based on the validity of the employee's claim and by proxy, now "their" claim.

The NFL likely overstepped as well, but if a major sponsor contacts you and tells you that they have evidence of an employee sexually harassing someone, the NFL would be hard-pressed to ignore it especially given the recent climate of not listening to victims of sexual harassment.

As I said in an earlier post, unless a court (criminal or civil) rules that Irvin did what the employee said (aka: guilty), then Marriott will retain legal liability for any and all negative impact the claims and subsequent actions taken against Irvin have inflicted on him.

It will be hard to prove either way who is right or wrong, but I have to believe at some point a judge is going to ask, "Why did you (Marriott) take it upon yourself to contact the NFL?" and Marriott better have a really good answer for that question.

Well said!!

I agree . And the Marriott does own the employees complaint once they act as such .

I’m not sure the answer would need to be anymore than Irvin was a representative of the NFL Network. And why they contacted them.

And I’m not sure inappropriate behavior needs to be a criminal act. In our company we had several complaints of inappropriate behavior which weren’t illegal.

Surely NFL Network had a clause in their contract in case there was another situation similar to what cause Irvin his job at ESPN.

It might be why he hasn’t filed suit on the Network. He’s wanting to blame the Marriott for the complaint . Ultimately there is where the liability falls. But as you have correctly stated , unless they prove the accusations or complaint false or fabricated the suit is basically a desperate measure by Irvin to save face as he knows it’s probably over for him on the Networks.

 

[Diehardblues]

Marriott kinda already answered that question in their latest filing. They said the NFL, who booked the rooms, told them to let them know if there was a problem with one of their guests. Whether that's documented somewhere in writing would be the obvious question.

Seems like that would be normal protocol to contact employer if there was an issue with employee or representative?

 

[Diehardblues]

Which his why there are two complaints, slander and interference in a business relationship. There is a contract between Irvin and the NFL. He is not a direct employee of the NFL. He has a similar contract with ESPN. Marriott has interfered in that relationship. Marriott might get off on the slander piece but they have to throw their employee under the bus.

Marriott chose to respond in such fashion after their employees complaint.

It would be interesting to know what their policies are on such complaints against guest at their hotel.

Do they normally just ask them to leave?

 

[Calvin2Tony2Emmitt2Julius]

No, I will not stop. I consider what he said in that press conference worse than what he might have said to that woman.

Enlightening

 

[Pass2Run]

Yeah i don’t see Mike collecting

Especially if he was trying to hit on her with the line about sleeping with so and so.

Like I said from the beginning, Irvin is a clown.

 

[MarcusRock]

Marriott chose to respond in such fashion after their employees complaint.

It would be interesting to know what their policies are on such complaints against guest at their hotel.

Do they normally just ask them to leave?

@Staubacher posted Marriott's reporting procedures a while back and here they are below.

"A violation of Marriott’s Harassment Prevention policy is grounds for disciplinary action up to and including termination. Hotels may remove and ban a guest for conduct that is
offensive or abusive to or poses risk to the safety of associates, including sexual harassment. In addition, managers who fail to promptly address complaints of harassment from their associates are subject to discipline. As demonstrated by Marriott’s Harassment Prevention Policy, the BIL system, and the No Room for Harassment message, Marriott strongly encourages all associates to immediately report any harassment, discrimination, or retaliation they may experience or observe. This applies equally to sexual harassment by an associate, supervisor, manager, guest, vendor, client, or customer."

"Marriott policy requires a prompt and thorough investigation of all sexual harassment complaints. Sexual harassment complaints and investigations are, to the extent possible, strictly
confidential. Information concerning sexual harassment complaints and investigations is shared internally or externally only with persons who have a legitimate need to know."

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/pft...covery-against-marriott.508631/#post-12640688

 

[starman22]

Yes, that was mine and it does blow that down.

This is also the first we heard that the NFL called in additional personnel to escort Irvin out of the hotel. I thought the hotel had already moved him on their own.

This also brings up why did they not stop him from making that call into 105.3? They had his schedule and knew that was on it.

What did they tell him when they helped escort him out of the hotel?

What if they hadn't told Irvin what was coming down at the time he did make that call in? That could have been the accelerator for sending him home.

Congrats CC, you have joined a very elite club on Cowboyszone, you admitted you were wrong.

This could be a learning experience for everyone.

Thanks,
Star

 

[kskboys]

Her claims actually were disclosed in a filing by Marriott. There may be more to them, but they clearly defined the claims she made.

The problem is that disclosure of that information does not remove legal liability from Marriott and the NFL.

If it were to turn out she lied or fabricated part or all of her claims (not saying that is the case of course), then Marriott and the NFL would still have publicly negatively impacted Irvin's reputation and career.

Marriott and the NFL could seek legal recource against the employee, but that would likely have to be settled after the Irvin lawsuit is resolved.

Marriott should have evicted Irvin and then advised the employee to file a criminal complaint.

Instead, they took it upon themselves to contact the NFL. At that moment, they inserted themselves into legal liability based on the validity of the employee's claim and by proxy now "their" claim.

The NFL likely overstepped as well, but if a major sponsor contacts you and tells you that they have evidence of an employee sexually harassing someone, the NFL would be hard-pressed to ignore it especially given the recent climate of not listening to victims of sexual harassment.

As I said in an earlier post, unless a court (criminal or civil) rules that Irvin did what the employee said (aka: guilty), then Marriott will retain legal liability for any and all negative impact the claims and subsequent actions taken against Irvin have inflicted on him.

It will be hard to prove either way who is right or wrong, but I have to believe at some point a judge is going to ask, "Why did you (Marriott) take it upon yourself to contact the NFL?" and Marriott better have a really good answer for that question.

I also find Marriott's actions in this matter highly questionable. IMO, this could've been handled much much better.

 

[kskboys]

@Staubacher posted Marriott's reporting procedures a while back and here they are below.

"A violation of Marriott’s Harassment Prevention policy is grounds for disciplinary action up to and including termination. Hotels may remove and ban a guest for conduct that is
offensive or abusive to or poses risk to the safety of associates, including sexual harassment. In addition, managers who fail to promptly address complaints of harassment from their associates are subject to discipline. As demonstrated by Marriott’s Harassment Prevention Policy, the BIL system, and the No Room for Harassment message, Marriott strongly encourages all associates to immediately report any harassment, discrimination, or retaliation they may experience or observe. This applies equally to sexual harassment by an associate, supervisor, manager, guest, vendor, client, or customer."

"Marriott policy requires a prompt and thorough investigation of all sexual harassment complaints. Sexual harassment complaints and investigations are, to the extent possible, strictly
confidential. Information concerning sexual harassment complaints and investigations is shared internally or externally only with persons who have a legitimate need to know."

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/pft...covery-against-marriott.508631/#post-12640688

Judging Irvin's reaction, there doesn't seem to have been any investigation that included his side of the story.

 

[kskboys]

but teams want to win so will put up with stuff (Thank God) tv shows dont need to as any of those guys can be replaced.

Would be hilarious to see Patrick Mahomes do exactly what Irvin did. The Chiefs would release a statement saying the views and opinions of Mr. Mahomes are those of his own and do not reflect the views and opinions of the KC Chiefs......oh, and we are extending Mahomes for another 5 years.

Winston did worse.

 

[kskboys]

I haven’t been able to keep up with this story and I know there’s been several very long threads on it.

Can someone who has been keeping up with this do me a solid and post a cliff notes version for folks like me?

Also do we actually know what exactly Irvin is being accused of at this point?

It's a big fat frickin' mess w/ no clear picture of what transpired. That about sums it up.

 

[kskboys]

Nice try but no cigar. The race card was played for effect and most likely orchestrated by his lawyer.

While I still have not taken a side in this case, Irvin's diatribe was disgusting, not to mention irrelevant to this entire mess.

 

[CouchCoach]

Congrats CC, you have joined a very elite club on Cowboyszone, you admitted you were wrong.

This could be a learning experience for everyone.

Thanks,
Star

Thanks Starman but I was married for 42 years. Admitting I am wrong comes easily.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Not sure if this has been posted, but this link provides the detail of what was allegedly said:

https://insidethestar.com/michael-i...ys-news&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitter

He supposedly asked her if she “ever had a black man inside of her.”