Employment & Labor Insider

The facts keep trickling out about Sherrone Moore, former head football coach for the University of Michigan, and his relationship with his executive assistant. (The assistant’s name has been disclosed unofficially, but not officially, so I’ll refer to her as “the assistant.”)

If you believe the New York Post, the sordid story is a mess. And was completely avoidable.

Here's the story, according to the Post (again, please note that this may or may not be accurate):

Coach Moore, who is married with three kids, had been having an affair with the assistant for a couple of years. The University of Michigan has the equivalent of a no-fraternization policy, which requires employees in certain consensual relationships to disclose the relationship. Coach Moore’s contract required him to abide by the policy. But he didn’t disclose the relationship.

Even though he didn't disclose the relationship (and neither did his assistant until very recently), there was quite a bit of scuttlebutt about the alleged relationship, as there would be in any workplace. The University even reportedly tried to conduct an investigation but came up with nothing.

But the scuttlebutt continued, and very recently, Coach Moore was advised by someone (the Athletic Director?) to distance himself from the assistant.

So he did. He allegedly fired his assistant. That'll create some distance!

The assistant understandably didn't appreciate being fired, and on Wednesday, December 10, she went to the University administration, disclosed the relationship, presented proof, and saved her job. Coach Moore, on the other hand, was fired for “cause” later that day. The firing for cause is significant because it means that the University doesn’t have to pay out the rest of his contract, worth a reported $14.5 to $16 million.

Shortly after his termination, Coach Moore allegedly went to the assistant’s apartment, told her she had ruined his life, and grabbed one or two butter knives and possibly scissors, and threatened to kill himself. He allegedly told the assistant that his blood would be on her hands. The assistant called the cops. Coach Moore escaped but was found shortly afterward and arrested. He’s currently out on $25,000 bond, with a hearing scheduled for January 22.

The University has retained a big law firm to conduct a thorough investigation of the Moore relationship as well as other not-so-kosher alleged issues in the University's athletic program.

The story of Coach Moore, whether true, partially true, or false, has a bunch of lessons for individual members of management. Here are the fumbles that cost Coach Moore his very lucrative job:

Fumble No. 1: He had an affair with a direct report. A consensual affair is not “sexual harassment” because the sexual behavior is not “unwelcome” to the participants. (Although it could be sexual harassment if the couple acts up at work, engaging in behavior that is “unwelcome” to bystanders.) But if one party is the boss and the other party is a subordinate, the risk of being accused of sexual harassment is very high when the predictable consequences of a workplace affair ensue. I blogged about this not too long ago (scroll down to "What the heck is really going on here?"). 

Fumble No. 2: He didn’t comply with U of M’s no-fraternization policy. Your employer probably doesn’t outlaw all intimate relationships between co-workers (it would be futile to try), but it may have a policy that requires co-workers in consensual relationships to disclose those relationships. If the parties are in a reporting relationship and disclose it, they may be required to decide which of them will be transferred to a different job, or quit. Coach Moore messed up big time by not disclosing the relationship per the policy, which his contract obligated him to follow.

Fumble No. 3: He lied. When specifically asked about the relationship, he lied to his bosses and said there wasn’t one.

Too soon?

Fumble No. 4: After being advised to distance himself from the assistant, he allegedly fired her (or allegedly tried to). If true, this is worse than a fumble. This is more like catching a long pass, sprinting into the end zone, spiking the ball and doing the Kazotsky Kick, and then realizing that you are in the wrong end zone. I’m going to assume the attempted termination wasn’t retaliatory because at the time of the firing the assistant hadn’t engaged in any legally protected activity. But, stupid? Oh. My. Gosh. Of course, that’s when all heck broke loose. She got mad, went to the administration, and reported that the affair had been going on for years and presented proof. Proof (allegedly) that the Coach was violating the no-fraternization policy, lying to the administration, and cheating on his wife, the mother of his three little children. Sounds like “cause for termination” to me. It did to U of M, too.

In addition, by trying to fire his assistant, Coach Moore may have converted a possible "hostile work environment" case to a "quid pro quo" case. Maybe not, because the assistant wasn't fired for refusing sexual favors, but who knows? Oh, and did I mention that she reportedly got a $50,000-a-year pay increase in 2024-25 with no apparent change in her job or job duties? If it's quid pro quo harassment, the University will automatically be liable.

Fumble No. 5: After he got fired, he just had to confront his assistant one last time. This one, I think, is somewhat understandable given everything that had happened, and he may not face dire criminal penalties for threatening to off himself with a couple of butter knives. But the arrest and criminal charges have certainly made a bad situation worse. If that's possible.

What about the assistant? Did the assistant also commit misconduct by (1) failing to report the relationship as required by the no-fraternization policy, and (2) lying about it when specifically asked? The obligation to report under the University policy did not apply to the subordinate in a boss-subordinate relationship, so the assistant apparently did not violate policy by failing to report, or maybe even for lying about it when asked. In any event, it will be hard for the University to terminate the assistant now without looking retaliatory.

What about U of M? It looks to me like the University tried to do the right thing and has done so thus far. They already had the no-fraternization policy in place. When they heard rumors, they followed up and even, apparently, tried to investigate. Once the University definitively learned what was going on, it halted the assistant's termination and fired Coach Moore. The only second-guessing I’ve seen in the news is that the University reportedly knew that the Coach was emotionally vulnerable but terminated his employment one-on-one, without any employee assistance or even a Human Resources representative on standby. If correct, then that might have contributed to Fumble No. 5. But out of all these fumbles, No. 5 is probably the least of U of M's worries.