Accusations of discriminations and incompetence were exchanged between the University of Memphis and one of its former employees, Curt Guenther, during day three of a wrongful termination hearing.
Although these statements were closing arguments, it’s most likely not the last time these charges will be made.
Guenther’s attorney Hite Mclean accused the University of age and gender discrimination when it terminated the then 64-year-old man in 2013.
The U of M denied the allegations and said Guenther was fired for his lackluster job performance. The University also maintained it had the right to terminate any employee with or without cause.
These arguments, presented during the hour long hearing, will likely be echoed in Shelby County Court—when the U of M will face a Tennessee Human Rights Act lawsuit filed by Guenther.
Even though the university-run hearing and Guenther’s lawsuit are separate, both deal with the same issue. The hearings results and testimony could also come into play at court, especially if the U of M loses.
If the university-appointed hearing officer, U of M Law Professor Jodie Wilson, were to rule that Guenther’s termination was unjust, he could be entitled to back pay and his former job back.
But moreover, her verdict could be used as evidence during the lawsuit. McLean might argue that the University already found itself guilty.
Wilson is also in the process of trying to obtain tenure at the U of M.
Even though the press and public attended the first two days of the hearing, the U of M denied requests for access to closing arguments.
According to one university official, there was no way for anyone to be present “because the parties involved were on their individual phones.”
However, The Daily Helmsman obtained a recording of the proceedings through the Tennessee Open Records law.
Guenther’s attorney rested his case squarely on two witnesses who testified that Guenther’s supervisor—Linda Bonnin the former vice president of communications—made derogatory remarks about the then 64-year-old man’s age and gender before and after she fired him.
Click here to read about a fromer U of M vice president accused of lying during his testimony
The first witnesses, former webmaster for the U of M Alysia Powell, previously testified that Bonnin told her “’My communications director is 64 years old —what are the chances that he will do any social networking?’”
The other witness, former student intern Jennifer Rorie, swore that “(Bonnin) said she had fired her director of communications and was looking for ‘younger fresher feminine faces’ to fill the office.”
Both witnesses worked under Bonnin in the department of communications.
Guenther’s lawyer said the testimonies together were “direct evidence that Mrs. Bonnin was improperly influenced by (Guenther’s) age and sex when she recommended his termination.”
He also accused Bonnin and Bob Eoff, a former vice president of communications before Bonnin, of lying during their testimony, and asked the hearing officer to consider that when she deliberated.
Both Bonnin and Eoff testified that Guenther made no effort to inform either of them that a U of M football player had been murdered on campus. As members of the U of M’s communications department, it would have been important for them to figure out the best way to tell the media what had happened, Guenther’s attorney explained.
“The Taylor Bradford murder wasone of the most significant events to ever occur at the U of M,” Mrs,” he said. “Mrs. Bonnin’s and Mr. Eoff’s both claim that Guenther made no attempt to notify them, yet (Guenther’s) cell phone records prove that he did call Bonnin twice on the night of Taylor Bradford’s murder”
The U of M’s legal counsel, Melanie Murry denied the discriminations allegations and questioned the trustworthiness of the witnesses. Bonnin “would never make a statement like that—especially not to a Helmsman reporter,” Murry argued.
Rorie was a reporter for The Daily Helmsman in 2013, but quit when Bonnin hired her as an intern.
“There was an article (about Curt’s terminations) published in the Helmsman after this alleged conversation happened, and Mrs. Rorie—a Helmsman reporter—did not put this information in the story,” Murry said. “If this was so true and so important, then this is something that would have been put in that article.”
U of M’s legal counsel then argued that Guenther’s lawyer had made too much of Powell’s testimony and that Bonnin’s statements concerning Guenther not being able to use social media were not based on discrimination.
“When Mrs. Bonnin made that statement, (Powell testified that she) didn’t think anything of the statements at the time,” Murry said. “She also stated that there was no discriminatory animus when Mrs. Bonnin made the statements.”
Finally, Murry argued that the exact events of the campus murder that happened in 2007 had no bearing on the current case.
“(Whether or not) Curt Guenther called Linda Bonnin or Bob Eoff on the night of the Taylor Bradford Murder is irrelevant,” Murry said. “The reality is, Curt’s tenure at the University of Memphis was a slow decline.”
Murry pointed to performance reviews and other documents written by Bonnin, some dated as far back as 2003, as evidence of Guenther less than satisfactory job performance.
The Daily Helmsman was denied access to the performance reviews. But emails and memorandums exchanged between Bonnin and then U of M President Shirley Rains describe Guenther as not being a team player in his department and being rebellious toward Bonnin’s authority.
“This has nothing to do with (Guenther’s) age,” Murry said. “This has nothing to do with him being a man. It has everything to do with him not being able to do his job… Mr. Guenther was not a stellar employee.”
Finally, the University’s legal counsel pointed to the contract that Guenther signed when he was hired which said the U of M president did not need a reason to terminate his employment.
“At the end of the day The University has the right to terminate for cause or no cause at all,” Murry said.
Even though no more evidence or testimony will be presented in the hearing, it could be months before a verdict is reached.
The U of M and Gunther will turn in their last documents on Jan 27. After that the Tennessee Uniformed Administrative Procedures Act, which lays out the rules for these hearings, allows the hearing officer 90 days to rule on the case.
In the two previous hearings, both of which lasted more than six hours each, the University was aided by assistant Attorney General for Tennessee Greg Holt of Nashville. However, he did not appear to be on the telephone conference call.
As far as can be discerned from the U of M’s recording, only the hearing officer, Guenther, Guenther’s attorney, the U of M’s legal counsel and Bonnin—who now works for Louisiana State University but was chosen as the representative for the U of M—were on the conference call.
