- within Immigration and Corporate/Commercial Law topic(s)
- with Finance and Tax Executives
- in European Union
- with readers working within the Automotive, Basic Industries and Healthcare industries
As featured in the Los Angeles Times former USC football coach Steve Sarkisian has filed suit against the university, claiming it threw him under the bus. Time will tell, as in all lawsuits, but several facts seem paramount. First, Coach Sarkisian did not tell USC that he was an alcoholic when applying for the job. Second, he apparently denied the disease when asked. Third, USC did send him to two counselors, according to the Times. Fourth, he did not seem to be able to meet the requirements of the job.
As a UCLA alumna, I have joked to my USC friends about whether he would have been fired had USC started the season well. I think I do the university a disservice. It has been a fine school for years and no longer can be razzed by us Bruins as the University of Spoiled Children or Figueroa (the street that it is on) Tech. USC promises to fight on to contest the suit and we support this decision.
That said, alcoholism is considered a disability and when notified, California employers are required to engage in the interactive process to determine whether a reasonable accommodation exists that does not present an undue hardship. Moreover, California Labor Code Section 1025 requires private employers to accommodate employees who wish to voluntarily enter an alcohol rehabilitation program, assuming again that it does not impose an undue hardship on the employer. However, California law does not excuse an employee's failure to perform his or her job duties, even if it the result of their alcoholism. In addition to its statements that Sarkisian denied he was an alcoholic, USC will certainly argue that Sarkisian embarrassed the university at pep rallies, showed up to work drunk, missed team meetings, failed to deliver on the field, and underperformed in other facets of his job. If USC terminated Sarkisian based on these failures to properly perform his job duties, whether or not Sarkisian's alcoholism had a role likely will not matter.
For more on the issue, please be sure to check out Fox Rothschild attorney Tom Basta's post on our Employment Discrimination blog and his feature in the article, "What Steve Sarkisian Needs to Prove to Win His Discrimination Case—and Why It's So Hard" on LXBN.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
