Rolo going "scorched earth"

[Fab5Coug]

His attorney has released a pretty pretty heated statement. They're pursuing legal action and claiming WSU discriminated against him for his Catholic faith.

A few important things to note from the release. First, Rolo's exemption was denied by the blind party review. He was not denied accommodations as it didn't even get that far. I know that was not known as of yesterday.

Second, the statement confirms he's Catholic, so kind of clarifies what his reason was for filing the exemption. Of course, a lot of people are linking the statements made by The Pope himself about vaccinations.

Third, the attorneys of Wazzuwatch can explain greater than I, but it's my understanding there is quite a legal precedent set for vaccine mandates, so I don't know if his suit will get far. Also, the exemption review was done blindly, so I don't know if he can claim discrimination. I wonder if he's just trying to air some dirty laundry for Chun and get some "shut up and go away" money.

 

[Brent H.]

He's claiming that Chun discriminated against his Catholic faith. Somebody probably can clarify this, but is that his angle since religion is a protective class?

 

[Observer11]

Just remember - it's all about the Benjamins.

Both ways.

This is divorce negotiation.

 

[CougPatrol]

As I've suspected, this has been in the works for a while now. I've always wondered if he and his wife didn't care for Pullman, and the mandate provided them with an out.

 

[NMBRCRNCHR]

Pretty simple, blind or not, a committee of folks employed by WSU denied him his God given right to refuse an experimental medical procedure. By denying his religious exemption, the school just opened themselves up. Many folks misunderstand what a religious exemption is and the definition of religion. It has nothing to do with the Pope or anyone else at the pulpit, it all revolves around a sincerely held belief that no man can or should be able to question. As soon as we allow administrators at our place of work to apply a litmus test to our sincere held beliefs, that my friends is the beginning of the end.

You also must consider how other state institutions analyzed and ruled on other religious exemptions, other college coaches were granted exemptions and accomidated. This should come out in discovery if it goes that far.

 

[chugspig]

He's claiming that Chun discriminated against his Catholic faith. Somebody probably can clarify this, but is that his angle since religion is a protective class?

If he was fired for being catholic. My whole family is catholic and got the shot. The pope said to get the shot. It sounds more like the interpretation of his bible than strictly catholic faith.

 

[CougPatrol]

If he was fired for being catholic. My whole family is catholic and got the shot. The pope said to get the shot. It sounds more like the interpretation of his bible than strictly catholic faith.

I agree, but religious exemptions are open ended. You can't (legally) argue, "well, the Pope says this, so all Catholics must move forward."

 

[Brent H.]

If he was fired for being catholic. My whole family is catholic and got the shot. The pope said to get the shot. It sounds more like the interpretation of his bible than strictly catholic faith.

The confusing thing is that the church also said that they will not force you to go against your moral conscience. If getting the vaccine goes against his moral conscience for whatever reason, they would allow the person to apply for an exemption and following the law accordingly. They just won't vouch for the reason as church teachings.

 

[chugspig]

The confusing thing is that the church also said that they will not force you to go against your moral conscience. If getting the vaccine goes against his moral conscience for whatever reason, they would allow the person to apply for an exemption and following the law accordingly. They just won't vouch for the reason as church teachings.

That’s why it seems like this case, if it makes it to court, will set legal precedent. I can’t understand how WSU keeps getting into the limelight of all these issues. Would be nice if some other school could take some bad PR for once.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

The confusing thing is that the church also said that they will not force you to go against your moral conscience. If getting the vaccine goes against his moral conscience for whatever reason, they would allow the person to apply for an exemption and following the law accordingly. They just won't vouch for the reason as church teachings.

How do you handle "moral conscience" decisions that are made using bad information? That's where this all gets very complicated.

 

[95coug]

Pretty simple, blind or not, a committee of folks employed by WSU denied him his God given right to refuse an experimental medical procedure. By denying his religious exemption, the school just opened themselves up. Many folks misunderstand what a religious exemption is and the definition of religion. It has nothing to do with the Pope or anyone else at the pulpit, it all revolves around a sincerely held belief that no man can or should be able to question. As soon as we allow administrators at our place of work to apply a litmus test to our sincere held beliefs, that my friends is the beginning of the end.

You also must consider how other state institutions analyzed and ruled on other religious exemptions, other college coaches were granted exemptions and accomidated. This should come out in discovery if it goes that far.

The university did not deny his right to refuse the vaccine. They just made him choose between that and his job. That will be the response to that claim. In fact, Bob Ferguson issued that as soon as the mandate came out.

Any lack of continuity between state agencies has some relevance, but the easy response to that is that the state (governor) provided no guidance regarding process or criteria, so each agency had to come up with its own. Blame the governor, not us.

The other thing that will come out in discovery is exactly what Rolo’s request said. If it comes out that his response to the questions was “none of your business,” the case is over.

WSU’s bar for exemption was not high. It didn’t require religious interpretation or biblical verses. If you could reasonably articulate how taking the vaccine violated your beliefs, you could get approved. The fact that his was denied - in spite of having a lawyer behind him - makes me think he didn’t try very hard.

 

[HometownCoug]

If he was fired for being catholic. My whole family is catholic and got the shot. The pope said to get the shot. It sounds more like the interpretation of his bible than strictly catholic faith.

It's far more nuanced than that. The National Catholic Bioethics Center does an extremely good job of analysis. And they factor in the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith's document. From the CDF (emphasis mine):

“Practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one's own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good. In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent.”

While it is true the CDF, PAV (Pontifical Academy of Life), NCBC, and others have said that "clinically recommended vaccinations could be used with a clear conscience because the use of vaccines does not entail morally relevant cooperation with voluntary abortion," they have also "recognizes that, in some cases, people may decide in good conscience to forgo any vaccines connected with the use of abortion-derived cell lines."

Note that what Il Papa says in unofficial statements, such as interviews, carry less weight than officially promulgated statements, such as those from the CDF and PAV. I am not aware of any official statements by the Pope on the vaccine or the vaccine mandate. And while lots of authorities have stated that the vaccine is morally acceptable, none have stated that is is required. And all oppose mandates.

References:

Note on the morality of using some anti-Covid-19 vaccines (21 December 2020)

Note on the morality of using some anti-Covid-19 vaccines, 21 December 2020

www.vatican.va

Points to Consider on COVID-19 Vaccines and Abortion-Derived Cell Lines — The National Catholic Bioethics Center

The utilization of abortion-derived cell lines in COVID-19 vaccines raises important ethical questions. The NCBC recognizes ethical distinctions among available COVID-19 vaccines based on their utilization of abortion-derived cell lines when all other considerations are equal. Vaccines that do not u

www.ncbcenter.org

NCBC Statement on COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates — The National Catholic Bioethics Center

To read a pdf version of this document, click here. The National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC) does not endorse mandated COVID-19 immunization with any of the three vaccines that have received approval or emergency use authorization as of August 23, 2021, from the US Food & Drug Admin

www.ncbcenter.org

 

[Brent H.]

How do you handle "moral conscience" decisions that are made using bad information? That's where this all gets very complicated.

He was probably going with the aborted fetus used in the vaccine approach. The information is out there J&J uses aborted fetuses, Moderna and Pfizer did in research. That is probably his argument. I don't know how Wilner knows it was denied unless Rolo leaked it to him.

 

[HometownCoug]

The confusing thing is that the church also said that they will not force you to go against your moral conscience. If getting the vaccine goes against his moral conscience for whatever reason, they would allow the person to apply for an exemption and following the law accordingly. They just won't vouch for the reason as church teachings.

Not "for whatever reason." The Church has always clearly stated that a well formed conscience is required. Moral choices can only be accurately made by well formed consciences. Poorly formed consciences may reduce culpability, but they never turn an immoral act into a moral one.

 

[BleedCrimsonandGray]

That’s why it seems like this case, if it makes it to court, will set legal precedent. I can’t understand how WSU keeps getting into the limelight of all these issues. Would be nice if some other school could take some bad PR for once.

Tennessee, perhaps?

Oh wait, thats story was gone by Sunday.

 

[chugspig]

It's far more nuanced than that. The National Catholic Bioethics Center does an extremely good job of analysis. And they factor in the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith's document. From the CDF (emphasis mine):

While it is true the CDF, PAV (Pontifical Academy of Life), NCBC, and others have said that "clinically recommended vaccinations could be used with a clear conscience because the use of vaccines does not entail morally relevant cooperation with voluntary abortion," they have also "recognizes that, in some cases, people may decide in good conscience to forgo any vaccines connected with the use of abortion-derived cell lines."

Note that what Il Papa says in unofficial statements, such as interviews, carry less weight than officially promulgated statements, such as those from the CDF and PAV. I am not aware of any official statements by the Pope on the vaccine or the vaccine mandate. And while lots of authorities have stated that the vaccine is morally acceptable, none have stated that is is required. And all oppose mandates.

References:

Note on the morality of using some anti-Covid-19 vaccines (21 December 2020)

Note on the morality of using some anti-Covid-19 vaccines, 21 December 2020

www.vatican.va

Points to Consider on COVID-19 Vaccines and Abortion-Derived Cell Lines — The National Catholic Bioethics Center

The utilization of abortion-derived cell lines in COVID-19 vaccines raises important ethical questions. The NCBC recognizes ethical distinctions among available COVID-19 vaccines based on their utilization of abortion-derived cell lines when all other considerations are equal. Vaccines that do not u

www.ncbcenter.org

NCBC Statement on COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates — The National Catholic Bioethics Center

To read a pdf version of this document, click here. The National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC) does not endorse mandated COVID-19 immunization with any of the three vaccines that have received approval or emergency use authorization as of August 23, 2021, from the US Food & Drug Admin

www.ncbcenter.org

Interesting, thanks. Rolo is probably more devout than I, so there is likely much I don’t know on this issue.

 

[Fab5Coug]

As I've suspected, this has been in the works for a while now. I've always wondered if he and his wife didn't care for Pullman, and the mandate provided them with an out.

If that's the case, then coach out the season, then take another gig elsewhere. Leaving mid season, then suing your former employer is not the way to leave and continue your career.

 

[Fab5Coug]

He's claiming that Chun discriminated against his Catholic faith. Somebody probably can clarify this, but is that his angle since religion is a protective class?

His exemption was denied. Chun had nothing to do with it. His attorney is stating they were told he would not be accommodated regardless, which I find really hard to believe. Would be very stupid for anyone at WSU to tell him that, when his exemption wasn't even approved to begin with.

 

[Fab5Coug]

Pretty simple, blind or not, a committee of folks employed by WSU denied him his God given right to refuse an experimental medical procedure. By denying his religious exemption, the school just opened themselves up. Many folks misunderstand what a religious exemption is and the definition of religion. It has nothing to do with the Pope or anyone else at the pulpit, it all revolves around a sincerely held belief that no man can or should be able to question. As soon as we allow administrators at our place of work to apply a litmus test to our sincere held beliefs, that my friends is the beginning of the end.

You also must consider how other state institutions analyzed and ruled on other religious exemptions, other college coaches were granted exemptions and accomidated. This should come out in discovery if it goes that far.

The courts disagree with you. There would be no vaccination mandates if anyone could claim a religious exemption with no denials.

 

[ShockandAweWSU]

Here is the thing.....anyone in and near or privy to info from Bohler complex has known about a very very tense relationship between Chun and Rolovich since this past Summer. Even before the mandate came out. Rolovich might not look great after all this, but Chun is gonna look like a major Dick. There is good reason why Rolo has looked non energetic and defeated.

 

[Fab5Coug]

He was probably going with the aborted fetus used in the vaccine approach. The information is out there J&J uses aborted fetuses, Moderna and Pfizer did in research. That is probably his argument. I don't know how Wilner knows it was denied unless Rolo leaked it to him.

It was in his attorney's statement.

 

[NMBRCRNCHR]

The courts disagree with you. There would be no vaccination mandates if anyone could claim a religious exemption with no denials.

What case are you referring to in regards to an employer denying a religious exemption and the courts agreeing with the denial of exemption?

 

[Brent H.]

It was in his attorney's statement.

Thanks, jus reread that. There was a lot of information in there.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

If he was fired for being catholic. My whole family is catholic and got the shot. The pope said to get the shot. It sounds more like the interpretation of his bible than strictly catholic faith.

My son switched to Catholicism after meeting the girl that ended up being his wife. Both of them and her entire family are vaccinated. There is no Catholic mandate to skip the vaccine. He may have a personal belief that his Catholic faith precludes him from getting the vaccine, but when you look at WSU's questions in the blind questionnaire, he was required to state whether he had other vaccines in his life and why this one is different. It will be interesting to see what his answers to the questions were and I'm guessing that they will come out in the lawsuit.

 

[Wazzubrooz]

Pretty simple, blind or not, a committee of folks employed by WSU denied him his God given right to refuse an experimental medical procedure. By denying his religious exemption, the school just opened themselves up. Many folks misunderstand what a religious exemption is and the definition of religion. It has nothing to do with the Pope or anyone else at the pulpit, it all revolves around a sincerely held belief that no man can or should be able to question. As soon as we allow administrators at our place of work to apply a litmus test to our sincere held beliefs, that my friends is the beginning of the end.

You also must consider how other state institutions analyzed and ruled on other religious exemptions, other college coaches were granted exemptions and accomidated. This should come out in discovery if it goes that far.

Hog wash !

 

[HometownCoug]

My son switched to Catholicism after meeting the girl that ended up being his wife. Both of them and her entire family are vaccinated. There is no Catholic mandate to skip the vaccine. He may have a personal belief that his Catholic faith precludes him from getting the vaccine, but when you look at WSU's questions in the blind questionnaire, he was required to state whether he had other vaccines in his life and why this one is different. It will be interesting to see what his answers to the questions were and I'm guessing that they will come out in the lawsuit.

Since we don't have his answers, we can only speculate.

I am a convert to Catholicism. I converted when I was 30 years old. I had done plenty of bad things prior to that. To ask "As an adult have you ever done X?" where X is something contrary to your faith is problematic in that a) doesn't account for man's fallen nature and that we are all sinners and b) doesn't account for sincere conversions or re-conversions. Other cases might include some sort of coercion and personal weakness, i.e. "My friend/wife/father/boss said I had to have this and lacking the personal conviction and moral fortitude at the time I caved in."

Easy answers are "I was unaware of the moral problems with the previous vaccines at the time I took them" or "I was a lukewarm Catholic at the time and didn't care" or "I wasn't even religious then and I've converted."

 

[roses04]

Let the games begin, I am sure WSU was well prepared for this, at least I hope so, with that much money on the line people don't walk away quietly. Rolo is trying to work out a settlement, because going to court probably won't work. There were several legal proceeding requesting the legality of the mandate, and others requesting an extension, all were denied by the courts. I am not a lawyer, but even the President and Pelosi said 12 months ago there would be no mandates, and that they weren't legal, here we are 12 months later, we have mandates and they seem to be legal based upon court rulings. So something doesn't wash to me. I guess we stay tuned.

 

[BraindeadCoug]

It may have been cleaner and easier for WSU just to suspend Rolo and the assistance without pay. The Brooklyn Nets did this with Kyrie Irving and no lawsuits have been filed.

WSU is rolling the dice to try and avoid paying the 60% of his contract amount. Rolo will get money as WSU will settle but it will be for less than the 60% due if terminated for a crappy record.

 

[Coug90]

His attorney has released a pretty pretty heated statement. They're pursuing legal action and claiming WSU discriminated against him for his Catholic faith.

A few important things to note from the release. First, Rolo's exemption was denied by the blind party review. He was not denied accommodations as it didn't even get that far. I know that was not known as of yesterday.

Second, the statement confirms he's Catholic, so kind of clarifies what his reason was for filing the exemption. Of course, a lot of people are linking the statements made by The Pope himself about vaccinations.

Third, the attorneys of Wazzuwatch can explain greater than I, but it's my understanding there is quite a legal precedent set for vaccine mandates, so I don't know if his suit will get far. Also, the exemption review was done blindly, so I don't know if he can claim discrimination. I wonder if he's just trying to air some dirty laundry for Chun and get some "shut up and go away" money.

Exactly what he’s doing. He’s got to know there’s no legal ground to stand on here. So holding the university hostage through pumping out bad publicity, even if misguided and using misinformation, is his recourse. And some of you are rooting for this? SMFH.

 

[Fab5Coug]

What case are you referring to in regards to an employer denying a religious exemption and the courts agreeing with the denial of exemption?

I believe there have been several suits against vaccine mandates, and all have been thrown out. Admittedly, I don't know if, or how many are specifically regarding religious exemptions. I very much doubt WSU went through the process of reviewing and denying exemptions without legal precedent to do so.

 

[NMBRCRNCHR]

I believe there have been several suits against vaccine mandates, and all have been thrown out. Admittedly, I don't know if, or how many are specifically regarding religious exemptions. I very much doubt WSU went through the process of reviewing and denying exemptions without legal precedent to do so.

Correct, as there hasn't been an opportunity to file as employees were only recently fired. The true test will be when a fired employee's religious exemption was denied and the employer has to substantiate the decision. I don't think that will end well for the employer.

 

[HometownCoug]

Correct, as there hasn't been an opportunity to file as employees were only recently fired. The true test will be when a fired employee's religious exemption was denied and the employer has to substantiate the decision. I don't think that will end well for the employer.

They think the blind committee shield them from this. I don't think the criteria to evaluate the exemptions is what should be attacked. Lack of a uniform criteria or the criteria being poorly crafted are fertile grounds for a lawsuit. All the blind committee gets them is protection against individuals being singled out.

 

[Observer11]

Not sure how filing a claim for wrongful termination is going 'scorched earth'. A multi-year at $3 million per might be worth spending a couple bucks exploring legal options. The courts and/or insurance company will decide if there's any there there.

Maybe it's just me but I have to imagine somebody around here has a former boss that they'd prefer to see burn in hell for all eternity if given half a chance and proper means/motivation to do it.

Heck, I might be that boss for someone and don't know it. I don't recall having an employee named WilleThePimp working for me. Maybe he went by William or Bill.

 

[roses04]

Here is the thing.....anyone in and near or privy to info from Bohler complex has known about a very very tense relationship between Chun and Rolovich since this past Summer. Even before the mandate came out. Rolovich might not look great after all this, but Chun is gonna look like a major Dick. There is good reason why Rolo has looked non energetic and defeated.

I assumed there was tension between Chun and Rolo, not sure why, it might have all started with the shot, who knows. Chun got along with Lane Kiffin and Mike Leach, neither one of those are easy to deal with. I do think Rolo was calling a bluff on the anti vax stance and figured he was more secure after the 3 game win streak, and I am sure his lawyer told him he had him covered even if he was fired. Needless to say the state wasn't bluffing. This is Washington State University, a public institution that reports to the State of Washington, over 20% of the state's budget goes to higher education, so don't think there isn't a lot of push and influence from Olympia on this. Rolo may see it more as Chun not liking him, but this whole push to get vaxed goes way above Chun. It really starts with Dimslee. I still think the mandate is BS, and I don't see how the judges keep ruling in favor of it, but I am no legal expert. This whole vax thing has allowed the state to get away with a lot, from rent payment and eviction moratoriums, to no credit scoring on insurance, which caused most peoples premiums to go up, to this terrible long term care tax we are stuck with now. Everyone needs to take a closer looks at what these dictators in Olympia are doing to all of us.

 

[Fab5Coug]

I assumed there was tension between Chun and Rolo, not sure why, it might have all started with the shot, who knows. Chun got along with Lane Kiffin and Mike Leach, neither one of those are easy to deal with. I do think Rolo was calling a bluff on the anti vax stance and figured he was more secure after the 3 game win streak, and I am sure his lawyer told him he had him covered even if he was fired. Needless to say the state wasn't bluffing. This is Washington State University, a public institution that reports to the State of Washington, over 20% of the state's budget goes to higher education, so don't think there isn't a lot of push and influence from Olympia on this. Rolo may see it more as Chun not liking him, but this whole push to get vaxed goes way above Chun. It really starts with Dimslee. I still think the mandate is BS, and I don't see how the judges keep ruling in favor of it, but I am no legal expert. This whole vax thing has allowed the state to get away with a lot, from rent payment and eviction moratoriums, to no credit scoring on insurance, which caused most peoples premiums to go up, to this terrible long term care tax we are stuck with now. Everyone needs to take a closer looks at what these dictators in Olympia are doing to all of us.

Oh man. I work in insurance and am having a LOT of conversations with my clients about that credit ban. I get the reason for it, but man, some of my clients are getting HAMMERED on rate because of it. 20, 30, 40% increases.

 

[WillieThePimp]

Not sure how filing a claim for wrongful termination is going 'scorched earth'. A multi-year at $3 million per might be worth spending a couple bucks exploring legal options. The courts and/or insurance company will decide if there's any there there.

Maybe it's just me but I have to imagine somebody around here has a former boss that they'd prefer to see burn in hell for all eternity if given half a chance and proper means/motivation to do it.

Heck, I might be that boss for someone and don't know it. I don't recall having an employee named WilleThePimp working for me. Maybe he went by William or Bill.

In your head, am I?

 

[wsudefense]

If he was fired for being catholic. My whole family is catholic and got the shot. The pope said to get the shot. It sounds more like the interpretation of his bible than strictly catholic faith.

Exactly As a practicing catholic he’s using the religion for his own benefit to sue. His greasy lawyer is also looking for a payout. I’ve never felt discriminated for my religion, just saying.

 

[Observer11]

In your head, am I?

yeah - the little one.

I just pissed you out.

Don't forget the shake.

 

[dgibbons]

His attorney has released a pretty pretty heated statement. They're pursuing legal action and claiming WSU discriminated against him for his Catholic faith.

A few important things to note from the release. First, Rolo's exemption was denied by the blind party review. He was not denied accommodations as it didn't even get that far. I know that was not known as of yesterday.

Second, the statement confirms he's Catholic, so kind of clarifies what his reason was for filing the exemption. Of course, a lot of people are linking the statements made by The Pope himself about vaccinations.

Third, the attorneys of Wazzuwatch can explain greater than I, but it's my understanding there is quite a legal precedent set for vaccine mandates, so I don't know if his suit will get far. Also, the exemption review was done blindly, so I don't know if he can claim discrimination. I wonder if he's just trying to air some dirty laundry for Chun and get some "shut up and go away" money.

I posted most if not all of this in a different thread. The vaccine mandate case is over 100 years old. There were no rapid tests back then. When a state action infringes on a civil liberty it must be by the least restrictive means possible. As far as I can tell, Washington is the only state that does not have a testing alternative (and the majority of states either don't have a mandate or have banned mandates).

So, assuming that you still have the right to refuse to put something in your body you don't want, how does the state of Washington explain why there is no testing alternative. How is someone that gets tested regularly, and has plenty of cash to pay for it himself, more dangerous than someone that is not?

 

[dgibbons]

The university did not deny his right to refuse the vaccine. They just made him choose between that and his job. That will be the response to that claim. In fact, Bob Ferguson issued that as soon as the mandate came out.

Any lack of continuity between state agencies has some relevance, but the easy response to that is that the state (governor) provided no guidance regarding process or criteria, so each agency had to come up with its own. Blame the governor, not us.

The other thing that will come out in discovery is exactly what Rolo’s request said. If it comes out that his response to the questions was “none of your business,” the case is over.

WSU’s bar for exemption was not high. It didn’t require religious interpretation or biblical verses. If you could reasonably articulate how taking the vaccine violated your beliefs, you could get approved. The fact that his was denied - in spite of having a lawyer behind him - makes me think he didn’t try very hard.

Counterpoint- Five coaches were denied exemptions (presumably). If that bar was not that high, was the process truly blind?