facts that are misstating

Since reading Fountain and Wong’s report in the New York Times, I believe that the penalty the perpetrator got was sufficient given the crime he committed. I think it was justified to end the relationship that began at the University of Notre Dame because he was unprofessional and could not be trusted. A head coach is supposed to be a mentor and direct the team members to success, but it appears that George O’Leary was unaware of the significance of this reality. Instead, he continued to defraud the system and students everywhere he went, convincing people to trust in him and his leadership. It is appropriate that he was shamed because it would act as a lesson to other people who are fond of the behavior. It sanctifies the university too because it shows the world that while a mistake could have happened in the hiring process, the same would not be extended to the work process. I, therefore, feel that it is justified to punish the coach as it was done because of his unprofessional behavior.

If I was his employer, I would not take him back because it would be both an embarrassment to the world and hurt the trust that the students have in the system. Considering that the university is an institution where skills and behavioral traits are nurtured, it is unfortunate that an intruder with unethical behavior managed to pass through it. In fact, it is best to avoid letting the students know anything about their former coach because they would wonder why the system is discouraging dishonesty while hiring people who have cheated all through their life. As the previous employer, I would, however, have to be bold and apologize to the students when I realize that they have already learned about the issue. The act of not taking O’Leary back is because it ensures that the institution upholds its stand on dishonesty because I would be a way of reminding the students that when they are expelled for irregularities and cheating, their fate will be final. It would thus ensue that sanctity is maintained within the university to promote trust.

I have learned several key issues about ethics from the report that I believe will make me a better person. The central lesson I have noted is that the mistake we make in life at an early age can be fixed before we are unable to control the outcome. For the coach, the mistake of having to lie about his credentials to earn a job early in his career ended up backfiring and causing him a lot of shame. It is thus crucial to maintain honesty at all times and when a mistake happens, we ought to look for a way to solve it amicably. I have also learned that we should take into consideration every details of anything without rushing in making a conclusion about something. For the institutions that O’Leary went through the details about the credentials seemed to be insignificant. It is a challenge for me when I am expected to serve a similar role in hiring workers because I would have to treat each claims as noteworthy and investigate every criterion before deciding whether someone is qualified or not. The article has thus been educative and relevant in describing the extreme outcome of careless dishonesty.

Work Cited

Fountain, John W., and Edward Wong. 2001. “Notre Dame Coach Resigns After 5 Days and a Few Lies.” The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/15/sports/notre-dame-coach-resigns-after-5-days-and-a-few-lies.html?mcubz=3.