Conference. At the grand hyatt hotel. If any of you are interested in health care, we will have a separate health care session. Either i was perfect or you this was not exciting at all. Thank you very much. It doesnt look like me at all. Im Randy Johnson at the u. S. Chamber of commerce, im just a lawyer, im not going to pretend to add to all the information people provided today. Im proud of this summit, its our fifth one. And my goal on this, five or six years ago, was, if we can bring together a lot of smart people and talk about a lot of technological advances, and move the beuhl forward a little bit on disease treatment, wellness programs, we can call it a day and go home. We earned our members dues. On a personal basis ive experienced a lot of i lost a sister, two sisters and a brother to cancer recently. Both under 70. I also had Prostate Cancer several years ago, i picked up a tid bit here in one of these meetings which gave me the information to reject a recommendation several
Its interesting how that came about. How do we fix these issues . I do think its possible to manage confrontation. Penn states hr 70 policy for dismissal of a faculty member talks about how the testimony can be obtained and gives the Panel Control over saying this is revictimizing or we need to do something. Its just not specific. I think requiring clear and convincing evidence to protect against procedural irregularities which is often the argument, well, we need this, if we dont have this, were going to have procedural irregularities. Why dont we fix the irregularities then. Instead of having a standard that is criminalizing, i think thats the important point, confrontation and the hearing i think in dismissal or suspension and the cases for students was pretty clear that that initial case was for suspension and they said if you need more, there might be more required. Use of technology, questions of the panel, interrogatories for people who choose not to attend, using the investigat
Its interesting how that came about. How do we fix these issues . I do think its possible to manage confrontation. Penn states hr 70 policy for dismissal of a faculty member talks about how the testimony can be obtained and gives the Panel Control over saying this is revictimizing or we need to do something. Its just not specific. I think requiring clear and convincing evidence to protect against procedural irregularities which is often the argument, well, we need this, if we dont have this, were going to have procedural irregularities. Why dont we fix the irregularities then. Instead of having a standard that is criminalizing, i think thats the important point, confrontation and the hearing i think in dismissal or suspension and the cases for students was pretty clear that that initial case was for suspension and they said if you need more, there might be more required. Use of technology, questions of the panel, interrogatories for people who choose not to attend, using the investigat
Its interesting how that came about. How do we fix these issues . I do think its possible to manage confrontation. Penn states hr 70 policy for dismissal of a faculty member talks about how the testimony can be obtained and gives the Panel Control over saying this is revictimizing or we need to do something. Its just not specific. I think requiring clear and convincing evidence to protect against procedural irregularities which is often the argument, well, we need this, if we dont have this, were going to have procedural irregularities. Why dont we fix the irregularities then. Instead of having a standard that is criminalizing, i think thats the important point, confrontation and the hearing i think in dismissal or suspension and the cases for students was pretty clear that that initial case was for suspension and they said if you need more, there might be more required. Use of technology, questions of the panel, interrogatories for people who choose not to attend, using the investigat
Its interesting how that came about. How do we fix these issues . I do think its possible to manage confrontation. Penn states hr 70 policy for dismissal of a faculty member talks about how the testimony can be obtained and gives the Panel Control over saying this is revictimizing or we need to do something. Its just not specific. I think requiring clear and convincing evidence to protect against procedural irregularities which is often the argument, well, we need this, if we dont have this, were going to have procedural irregularities. Why dont we fix the irregularities then. Instead of having a standard that is criminalizing, i think thats the important point, confrontation and the hearing i think in dismissal or suspension and the cases for students was pretty clear that that initial case was for suspension and they said if you need more, there might be more required. Use of technology, questions of the panel, interrogatories for people who choose not to attend, using the investigat