- Joined
- May 18, 2015
- Messages
- 14,094
- Reaction score
- 19,621
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments."raises fundamental questions bearing on legitimacy of arbitration as a means of alternative dispute resolution"
If the restrictions on arbitrators acting outside the scope of their authority, imposing their own industrial justice, or acting with bias are weakened so greatly as to permit the enforcement of the Commissioner’s award, it will fundamentally erode the public’s trust and confidence in arbitration.
So is that 5 or 6 now? Anyone but me notice the complete LACK of amicus briefs supporting the NFL??
Yes. Let's just say that it sure seems like Ted Olson is calling in some favors.So this is a pretty big deal?
Incoming amicus briefs from the Colts and the Ravens..
It's not faaaaiiirrrrr!!!!!
Yes. Let's just say that it sure seems like Ted Olson is calling in some favors.
He probably promised a lot of people that Tom would be a guest at their kids' birthday parties if they would write a couple words.....
The initial discipline was based on the Commissioner’s finding that Brady was “at least generally aware of the actions of the Patriots’ employees involved in the deflation of the footballs and that it was unlikely that their actions were done without [Brady’s] knowledge.” JA329. In its appeal, the Association, therefore, contested whether the evidence relied upon by the Commissioner constituted “a legally []adequate basis upon which to impose this . . . discipline,” JA 1119, i.e., whether “general[] aware[ness]” of the wrongful actions of others is a sufficient basis for discipline under the CBA.
I am not a legal expert but there is also the element of protecting your self-interest at stake here. Any court decision that rubber stamps this kind of fundamentally unfair reasoning by an arbitrator is a potential threat to labor law and unions. So while I am sure Olson called a few people I am not sure if it required a lot of favors...
I mentioned this when the ruling came down, but the visibility of the case makes it the perfect vehicle for labor to strike a major blow at arbitration agreements. It's going to the Supreme Court.
That said, unless Clinton is elected and gets a justice through, it will just end up 4-4 and the lower court ruling will stand. And even if she does get a justice through (or if the Senate approves Garland in the lame duck session), there's no guarantee the justice will be sufficiently pro-labor and Clinton's never been much of a supporter of the working class; there's also no guarantee Garland would land on the labor side, either.
I mentioned this when the ruling came down, but the visibility of the case makes it the perfect vehicle for labor to strike a major blow at arbitration agreements. It's going to the Supreme Court.
That said, unless Clinton is elected and gets a justice through, it will just end up 4-4 and the lower court ruling will stand. And even if she does get a justice through (or if the Senate approves Garland in the lame duck session), there's no guarantee the justice will be sufficiently pro-labor and Clinton's never been much of a supporter of the working class; there's also no guarantee Garland would land on the labor side, either.