Luxy312 Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 I understand the Ray Rice guilt discussion has probably already been done to death. What I want to know is where DeMaurice Smith is in all of this. As far as I can tell, there's been nothing materially new that could be taken from the video that wasn't already admitted in written testimony of Rice. Given that they had already handed out a penalty, I would think DeMaurice Smith would be yelling at the top of his lungs that the league is overstepping its authority. Does anyone else find it interesting that his is silent on this subject? Not even a whimper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Maybe not publicly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 I understand the Ray Rice guilt discussion has probably already been done to death. What I want to know is where DeMaurice Smith is in all of this. As far as I can tell, there's been nothing materially new that could be taken from the video that wasn't already admitted in written testimony of Rice. Given that they had already handed out a penalty, I would think DeMaurice Smith would be yelling at the top of his lungs that the league is overstepping its authority. Does anyone else find it interesting that his is silent on this subject? Not even a whimper. Not true. I saw a tweet that quoted Smith as saying the tape was disturbing. http://www.si.com/nfl/2014/09/08/nflpa-ray-rice-suspension-cut-demaurice-smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark80 Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) Not entirely sure on the legality issues here, but I would assume that, as a private entity, the NFL can do whatever they want as long as it doesn't violate Federal / State laws or the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Now, there is certainly no law protecting an employee from being terminated or suspended numerous times for the same incident (as there is in criminal law - double jeopardy) especially if it is shown that they lied about the incident (as rumored here when they apparently played down the incident in interviews and even hinted that she was the instigator) and further evidence emerges at a later point. However, there could be something in the CBA regarding punishments and a sort of Double Jeopardy Clause (or possibly even in Rice's personal contract). If there is and Smith is not doing anything then he should be terminated as the Union Head. Regardless of how it looks, what they did, the PR of it all, whatever, the job of the union head is to protect his members and their negotiated rights. I feel that there is nothing in there to cover Ray Rice in this case though and that's why Smith is silent and not backing his union member. Edited September 9, 2014 by Mark80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 1. The original suspension was supposedly based on a version of events as told by Ray and Janay, which apparently was not true based on what was shown in the tape. (They said it could barely be called a punch, and also that she was attacking him and he defended himself.) 2. I was wondering if the NFLPA would fight it, but honestly I don't think they are willing to deal with the negative publicity that would come from doing so, especially given how many players have spoken out in support of the increased suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I don't think the NFLPA is dumb enough to try to defend Rice. Right now Roger is getting skewered for this entire thing left and right. Why would the NFLPA want to share the blame with Roger and be dragged down with him, particularly when so many players came out and blasted Rice too. Could be players have threatened to quit the union if it tries to defend him much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Anyone indicted moving forward like the DT for the 49ers is in for it. Every company does damage control. This isn't different than most fortune 100 companies. He actually receive more rope than most given his skills. He deserved th punishment fmhis actionsl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark80 Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) 2. I was wondering if the NFLPA would fight it, but honestly I don't think they are willing to deal with the negative publicity that would come from doing so, especially given how many players have spoken out in support of the increased suspension. I don't think the NFLPA is dumb enough to try to defend Rice. Right now Roger is getting skewered for this entire thing left and right. Why would the NFLPA want to share the blame with Roger and be dragged down with him, particularly when so many players came out and blasted Rice too. Could be players have threatened to quit the union if it tries to defend him much. The Players Association doesn't have a choice in the matter. If there is ground to stand on in challenging the new suspension, then they are legally bound to do so. Unions are under a legal obligation to protect and defend every single one of their members under the agreed upon terms of the CBA. It is known as the "Right of fair Representation." If a union does not do so, they will be held accountable by the National Labor Relations Board. Accordingly, if there is a "double jeopardy" protection in the CBA and Smith isn't doing anything about this Rice can file a claim with the NLRB and the Union (and Smith) would be held accountable. That's why I don't think there is anything they can do, no ground to protest it (unless it's happening behind the scenes) otherwise, they would be required to do so. Labor Law is a bit rusty from my Undergrad and Law School days, but that's how I remember it. Edited September 10, 2014 by Mark80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 The Players Association doesn't have a choice in the matter. If there is ground to stand on in challenging the new suspension, then they are legally bound to do so. Union's are under a legal obligation to protect and defend every single one of their members under the agreed upon terms of the CBA. If a union does not do so, they will be held accountable by the National Labor Relations Board. Accordingly, if there is a "double jeopardy" protection in the CBA and Smith isn't doing anything about this Rice can file a claim with the NLRB and the Union (and Smith) would be held accountable. That's why I don't think there is anything they can do, no ground to protest it (unless it's happening behind the scenes) otherwise, they would be required to do so. Labor Law is a bit rusty from my Undergrad and Law School days, but that's how I remember it. it could also simply be that they are researching the issue and doing their own investigation before publicly putting their foot in their mouth on a pretty major story that they thought was already put to bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) The Players Association doesn't have a choice in the matter. If there is ground to stand on in challenging the new suspension, then they are legally bound to do so. Union's are under a legal obligation to protect and defend every single one of their members under the agreed upon terms of the CBA. Agreed, but the CBA gives pretty much complete power to the Commissioner when to comes to the personal conduct policy, this give them a way out of fighting something that looks this bad. Edited September 10, 2014 by Captain Caveman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 The Players Association doesn't have a choice in the matter. If there is ground to stand on in challenging the new suspension, then they are legally bound to do so. Union's are under a legal obligation to protect and defend every single one of their members under the agreed upon terms of the CBA. It is knows as the "Right of fair Representation." If a union does not do so, they will be held accountable by the National Labor Relations Board. Accordingly, if there is a "double jeopardy" protection in the CBA and Smith isn't doing anything about this Rice can file a claim with the NLRB and the Union (and Smith) would be held accountable. That's why I don't think there is anything they can do, no ground to protest it (unless it's happening behind the scenes) otherwise, they would be required to do so. Labor Law is a bit rusty from my Undergrad and Law School days, but that's how I remember it. Yup The union is fighting for Aaron Hernandez's bonus money right now too. They have a legal obligation. The Ravens cut him and he is most likely blackballed anyhow but Vick got a second chance so you never know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts