Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Lets Clear Some Things Up About The Saints* Suspensions.

CPSupporter

By CPSupporter,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

CPSupporter Newbie

CPSupporter

Posted
Posted

New York and New Orleans are both "at will" states which essentially means that any private or non-profit organization can fire or suspend an employee without having to follow a set of standards or rules. Goodell could suspend anyone he wants to because it is not a public organization or operation. I cannot say that the players suspended were guilty or not. I haven't seen the evidence personally. However, there doesn't need to be evidence for suspensions to happen. Goodell could have told Vilma and the rest he was simply making a statement out of them and they couldn't do anything about it because they are employees of an organization. All of you who are trying to claim that its not right due to the lack of evidence or trial, that is an awful point. Once again, a few of the members of this message board fire off statements without doing any sort of research. Lets fix that...agreed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Inimicus Mentor

Inimicus

Posted
Posted

Employment contracts can impose limits on an employers ability to fire or suspend employees. Being an "at will" state means nothing if there are explicit policies in place that govern the employer/employee relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xtheronx Newbie

xtheronx

Posted
Posted

New York and New Orleans are both "at will" states which essentially means that any private or non-profit organization can fire or suspend an employee without having to follow a set of standards or rules. Goodell could suspend anyone he wants to because it is not a public organization or operation. I cannot say that the players suspended were guilty or not. I haven't seen the evidence personally. However, there doesn't need to be evidence for suspensions to happen. Goodell could have told Vilma and the rest he was simply making a statement out of them and they couldn't do anything about it because they are employees of an organization. All of you who are trying to claim that its not right due to the lack of evidence or trial, that is an awful point. Once again, a few of the members of this message board fire off statements without doing any sort of research. Lets fix that...agreed?

not necessarily true .. sometimes with organizations that are such broad reaching as the NFL .. courts like to see some sort of due process

kinda like the same process when someones workers comp claim gets denied (e.g.) .. they get a chance to argue their case .. Either in person .. Phone .. Or in writing

Also, technically the NFL operates in more than those two states .. the suspensions came from the NFL .. not the teams themselves

due process is simply an opportunity to plead one's case

however if the behavior was bad enough .. suspension without that opportunity could be justified with sufficient evidence .. just be ready to back it up in court

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
Posted

In actuality, they violated their contracts, and even their own union agreed upon rules.

From the NFL's official statement, regarding non-contract pay-for-performance and bounty programs:

Participation by players in any such program is prohibited by the NFL Constitution and Bylaws, the standard NFL Player Contract, and the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

So essentially, they're triple offenders, not only having violated NFL rules, but also the CBA and their own contracts, which have specific language written in that prohibits participation in any such program.

Mind you, I wouldn't bet on any one of them actually having read their contracts (that's the agent's job) but they did sign them and thus, are bound by them.

And let's be clear. The NFL technically is not required to show that this was a "pay to injure" program or that there was any intent to hurt other players. Their participation in a "pay for performance" scheme is enough to warrant suspension on its own.

That said, I have little doubt that they can prove the intent to injure as well, but they don't actually need to in order to justify the punishments. Still, the people arguing that this was only "pay for performance" and not "pay to injure" seem to think that matters. It doesn't. You may as well be arguing "he only stole $10,000 dollars, not $20,000" :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
I am Hubby Newbie

I am Hubby

Posted
Posted

Well said Les, well said.

If you come here for the news, you can get your fill. If you want entertainment with that, we got that as well. Got an opinion, but are too lazy to do the research. Bring it on, plenty around here that will set the record straight. Love to argue, debate, exchange points of view, you may wish to bring your patience cuz you may need it. Hell, we even have room for you folks who are, shall we say, less than exstatic with how things are done.

If you can handle it, we got it. Everyone welcome, satisfaction not guaranteed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...