NFLPA to file grievance for Hernandez' bonus

[Get it shawtaay]

Story

A grievance is expected to be filed shortly because the Patriots did not pay an $82,000 workout bonus to Hernandez that was scheduled to be paid on Aug. 1, a source told FOX Sports.

 

[dannydyn]

fck him, and fck them for siding with a murderer.

 

[Sicilian]

fck him, and fck them for siding with a murderer.

The Patriots can cut him without a conviction, but the NFLPA really can't operate in those grey areas. Until they get a guilty verdict, they have to fight to protect his interests.

I agree with fck him though.

 

[Ivan]

The NFLPA has to represent their members. They will lose this one but they really don't have much of a choice.

 

[Rob0729]

This is a PR nightmare for the NFLPA. Gotta represent a murderer for money he really shouldn't get if there was any real justice in the world. It will be far worse when they file the grievance for his millions in signing bonus money. This one might go under the radar because it is a small amount in NFL salary terms.

 

[BSR]

The Patriots can cut him without a conviction, but the NFLPA really can't operate in those grey areas. Until they get a guilty verdict, they have to fight to protect his interests.

I agree with fck him though.

Do they really have to protect him? What happens if they don't?

Seems to me that is an excuse. The Patriots could have done the same thing about cutting him said we had to keep on the team for salary cap reasons. I know they are different but at the end of the day its still hiding behind procedure. I don't see what the NFLPA loses by not doing anything in this case.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Good luck winning this PR battle, NFLPA.

 

[patchick]

This is a PR nightmare for the NFLPA. Gotta represent a murderer for money he really shouldn't get if there was any real justice in the world. It will be far worse when they file the grievance for his millions in signing bonus money. This one might go under the radar because it is a small amount in NFL salary terms.

Yep, you have to think the union is horrified to be put in this position, but they have no choice. I imagine they'll try to stay very narrow and technical, focusing on exactly which workouts were required and attended.

Then they'll pray they don't have to go after the signing bonus, which would make it much harder to avoid the bigger picture.

 

[Sicilian]

Do they really have to protect him? What happens if they don't?

Seems to me that is an excuse. The Patriots could have done the same thing about cutting him said we had to keep on the team for salary cap reasons. I know they are different but at the end of the day its still hiding behind procedure. I don't see what the NFLPA loses by not doing anything in this case.

Because if they don't at least try to protect him, and he is found Not Guilty (a long shot, but stranger things have happened), they open themselves up to dissension in the ranks. And it's all well and good to say, "Well in this case we KNOW he's guilty so it's okay to ditch him." But in that case, where do you draw the line? Exactly how "guilty" does a guy have to appear pre-trial for him to lose his union rights? That's a slippery slope I don't think the PA wants to go down.

 

[RayClay]

Working out in prison counts?

 

[BSR]

Because if they don't at least try to protect him, and he is found Not Guilty (a long shot, but stranger things have happened), they open themselves up to dissension in the ranks. And it's all well and good to say, "Well in this case we KNOW he's guilty so it's okay to ditch him." But in that case, where do you draw the line? Exactly how "guilty" does a guy have to appear pre-trial for him to lose his union rights? That's a slippery slope I don't think the PA wants to go down.

Is there really anyone in the ranks that is going to stand up and say "Hey you should be fighting for Hernandez's money". I don't buy that one. Further I don't see why the NFLPA can't take a stand and say that there is a line where even we won't protect you. Sure they exposes them a bit but who cares? At some point doing the right thing should take precedence.

I think far too many of you are giving the NFLPA a free ride on this one.

 

[patchick]

Do they really have to protect him? What happens if they don't?

Seems to me that is an excuse. The Patriots could have done the same thing about cutting him said we had to keep on the team for salary cap reasons. I know they are different but at the end of the day its still hiding behind procedure. I don't see what the NFLPA loses by not doing anything in this case.

Personally, I don't think it's "hiding behind prodecure" for a union to demand that its members' contracts be honored, without regard to union leaders' opinions on those members as human beings.

IMO it's closer to a public defender dutifully representing somebody he thinks is the scum of the earth. It's maintaining the due processes of a civil society -- and certainly necessary for the union until Hernandez is actually found guilty.

 

[fnordcircle]

Personally, I don't think it's "hiding behind prodecure" for a union to demand that its members' contracts be honored, without regard to union leaders' opinions on those members as human beings.

IMO it's closer to a public defender dutifully representing somebody he thinks is the scum of the earth. It's maintaining the due processes of a civil society -- and certainly necessary for the union until Hernandez is actually found guilty.

 

[BSR]

Personally, I don't think it's "hiding behind prodecure" for a union to demand that its members' contracts be honored, without regard to union leaders' opinions on those members as human beings.

IMO it's closer to a public defender dutifully representing somebody he thinks is the scum of the earth. It's maintaining the due processes of a civil society -- and certainly necessary for the union until Hernandez is actually found guilty.

A public defender protects a citizen's constitutional rights. I don't see the connections with the NFLPA. Sorry I think you should have to meet certain ethical standards to part of a union just like you would in many other parts of society.

Society doesn't fall apart because the NFL Players Association refuses to fight for a murder's bonus money.

Why couldn't the union expel Hernandez's from the union as soon as he was charged with Murder and say that they would reconsider his application if he was found not guilty? Its not as if Hernandez couldn't fight his own legal battles on the contract front.

 

[Sicilian]

Is there really anyone in the ranks that is going to stand up and say "Hey you should be fighting for Hernandez's money". I don't buy that one. Further I don't see why the NFLPA can't take a stand and say that there is a line where even we won't protect you. Sure they exposes them a bit but who cares? At some point doing the right thing should take precedence.

I think far too many of you are giving the NFLPA a free ride on this one.

And again, you're saying they can take a stand and say, "Here's the line," but where IS the line? If he was just being charged with obstruction and had nothing to do with the murder itself, should they treat him the same? If the evidence was less clear? How clear does it have to be? How many ins and outs are you willing to consider to say, "This guy is likely ENOUGH to be guilty that we no longer have to protect his interests." I think it's a wavier line than you think.

 

[BSR]

And again, you're saying they can take a stand and say, "Here's the line," but where IS the line? If he was just being charged with obstruction and had nothing to do with the murder itself, should they treat him the same? If the evidence was less clear? How clear does it have to be? How many ins and outs are you willing to consider to say, "This guy is likely ENOUGH to be guilty that we no longer have to protect his interests." I think it's a wavier line than you think.

You don't think Murder is over that line? I'm pretty sure it is. If that isn't then what is? If the Tsarnev brothers were part of the union would you be ok with them filing the grievance?

Its just a worker's union. They can expel members for not paying dues but they can't expel them for being charged with murder?

 

[TyronePoole]

Re: Re: NFLPA to file grievance for Hernandez' bonus

And again, you're saying they can take a stand and say, "Here's the line," but where IS the line? If he was just being charged with obstruction and had nothing to do with the murder itself, should they treat him the same? If the evidence was less clear? How clear does it have to be? How many ins and outs are you willing to consider to say, "This guy is likely ENOUGH to be guilty that we no longer have to protect his interests." I think it's a wavier line than you think.

This. The NFLPA is not an adjudicator of culpability, its mandate cannot and should not include making calls about whether or not its members morally deserve something or are likely to be convicted based on the weight of the evidence they have seen. If you demand they do so in one case, no matter how clear cut you think it is, you are setting the precedent that going forward a player's specific case should be weighed by some arbitrary standard of "justice" and that the owners can put pressure on them to give in or waive all sorts of grievances because "it's pretty obvious hes a bad guy." Thats not the role of a union nor should it ever be, thats just a violation of its mandate and the beginning of further concessions.

Keep in mind that if those of us that are certain he's going to be convicted are correct then the only parties that are likely to receive this money are a child whose father is in prison for life or the family of odin lloyd.

 

[resdubwhite]

the team should give the money to Odin Lloyds family and then wait to see the next move by NFLPA. just for ****s and giggles.

 

[patchick]

A public defender protects a citizen's constitutional rights. I don't see the connections with the NFLPA.

Connection: the NFLPA protects a member's contractual rights.

Pondscum as he appears to be, Hernandez has yet to be convicted of anything. The union is not judge and jury. They can hardly say "Players, we have your backs! We fight for your rights in times of trouble! Unless, you know, you actually get in trouble, in which case we never met you."

Its just a worker's union. They can expel members for not paying dues but they can't expel them for being charged with murder?

You can't retroactively expel anybody. You're trying to change history. He was a union member at the time the Patriots cut him.

 

[IllegalContact]

Do they really have to protect him? What happens if they don't?

Seems to me that is an excuse. The Patriots could have done the same thing about cutting him said we had to keep on the team for salary cap reasons. I know they are different but at the end of the day its still hiding behind procedure. I don't see what the NFLPA loses by not doing anything in this case.

if it was a lawyer, what you propose would have the lawyer disbarred

they have to protect him.......contractually and/or legally