The decision was mine and mine alone. It was not based on donor pressure or political pressure; it was based on a culmination of discussions – over a period of time – that convinced me we could not effectively partner to build a world-class law school at UC Irvine.
well, let us look at the timeline. drake offered chemerinsky a job on august 16, 2007. chemerinsky supposedly signed a contract on sept. 4, 2007 and drake rescinded the contract on sept. 11, 2007.
what possibly could have happened between august 16 and september 11 that convinced drake that chemerinsky was not the person for the job? drake alludes in the la times article that he did not want chemerinsky to write op ed pieces because chemerinsky should "focus on things like legal education in this new role." but the op ed piece that apparently irked drake was published on august 16, 2007 -- the same day drake made the job offer to chemerinsky and well before chemerinsky signed the sept. 4 contract.
if drake was so unhappy about the existence of the op ed piece, he should not have made the offer when the op ed piece was published. if drake did not know about the op ed piece until after he made the offer, drake should not have negotiated terms of the contract or given the contract to chemerinsky (i assume that negotiations occurred between august 16 and september 4 -- 19 days!!!). instead, drake should have immediately rescinded the offer before there was any acceptance.
drake then makes this excuse:
In fact, there are individuals here with political views far more liberal than Professor Chemerinsky’s who conduct research, teach and serve in senior administrative positions.
still sounds bad...
No comments:
Post a Comment