View Single Post
02-20-2012, 08:04 AM
HFBoards Sponsor
BrockH's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,630
vCash: 500
Here's some proposed wording changes for Article 9 to reflect the commissioners having the first call. It was a bit more of an overhaul so it's not just a case of bolding added stuff:

a. Any league member that violates the rules or spirit set out in this CBA will be subject to discipline at the discretion of the commissioners.
b. Any league member can file a complaint with the commissioners for their review.
c. The commissioners’ decision will be open to formal appeal. Such an appeal should be posted in the HFBoards thread in a professional manner, and will be reviewed by the tribunal.
d. In cases where there is a conflict of interest, tribunal members will recuse themselves and be replaced by a league member. The league member will be selected by the remaining tribunal members. Tribunal members should avoid discussing the penalty until they have formed a complete panel.
e. The three member panel must reach a majority decision. In a case where all 3 panel members are split, then all 3 options will be put forward for a league vote (the penalized party and tribunal members excluded from the vote). Once a decision has been reached the panel’s decision will be binding and without appeal except in cases where there is grievance filed due to a conflict of interest.
f. A grievance may be raised against the tribunal only if impartiality is concerned. If such a grievance is raised, it is to be done via a posting in the HFBoards thread in a professional manner.
g. The commissioners shall jointly determine the validity of the grievance. A grievance is accepted unless the commissioners unanimously reject it (i.e. if one commissioner sees it’s merit, then it is considered valid).
h. If the party filing the grievance believes that both commissioners are also in a conflict of interest, then they must state so in their initial filing (i.e. before the commissioners pass their ruling), in which case the grievance will bypass both the tribunal and the commissioners and go to a league vote.
i. In a case such as (f), the party filing the grievance must propose their own outcome. This is to be part of their grievance filing. Once the grievance has been posted, all league members except for the accused and the 3-member panel will have 48 hours to publically vote in the forum thread. The vote will be either for the panel, in which case the ruling is upheld, or for the accused, in which case their proposed alternative penalty (if any) would be used.
j. In the case of (h), the voters will be directed to vote for the accused’s alternate penalty if and only if they perceive a conflict of interest and believe the accused has proposed the more reasonable penalty. The purpose of a grievance is not to seek a second opinion because you don’t like the panel’s decision. It is only to be used in a case where a conflict of interest existed and the panel members failed to recuse themselves, resulting in a biased decision.

BrockH is offline   Reply With Quote