View Single Post
01-17-2013, 11:50 AM
Registered User
pld459666's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,955
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
This is what I was referring to in regard to the grievance.
I disagree that there is any basis for a greivance, the players were going to get their full salary thsi year had the league not agreed to an early buy out.

Player goes home for the season and is bought out over the summer.

He gets paid his full salary and 2/3's of next year(s) number.

Player gets bought out today, he gets this year salary in full and 2/3's of next year(s) number.

either way it plays out the player is still getting the same money from the team.

If a player has a problem with this they have remedies available to them in the form of looking to terminate the remaining terms of their agreement. The teams would have no issues letting each of these guys out of their contracts.

Now, if the player wanted out of their deal and the team gave them a problem while still asking them to stay home, well then yeah I see the greivance there.

I have no doubt that a judge would tell the player, if you do not like being asked to stay home, enforce the remedies you have available to you by walking away from the contract.

While I am a pro player guy, all this talk of greivance is money grab by the players so that they can have their cake and eat it as well.

Front office guys get fired all the time. Alot of them are not bought out. They are "re-assigned" and quite often are asked to "work" from home.

These guys are getting paid to do nothing. However, they are also allowed and encouraged to seek employment elsewhere so that the teams are off the hook from paying them any further.

this is no different.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote