DC Tom Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 Not clear to me. A unionized employer has the right to unilaterally change certain less important work rules, while other things have to be collectively bargained. It's possible that the teams or the league could unilaterally enact and enforce a "no protest" rule, but I'm not certain. Unless there was a rule change, though, I doubt they could cut (or even deactivate) a player for protesting. Actually, there's nothing in the CBA that prevents it. Players are basically contractors, not employees, and can be (and are) dismissed for conduct detrimental to the franchise. The literal wording is "you have engaged in personal conduct which, in the reasonable judgement of the Club, adversely affects or reflects on the Club." I would expect that any attempt at that would be challenged through arbitration to the courts (or NLRB), solely on the definition of "reasonable," which for better or worse is not defined in the CBA. But yes, a team can absolutely cut a player for protesting. It seems so obvious, so why is it so hard? I have some thoughts, but..... What's so obvious? That speech is speech, and the principles of the First Amendment and equal protection do not include any qualifiers for content? People have a hard time with that, because they believe that people have an inalienable right to not be offended. Which they do...but only as a matter of personal choice, not government policy, or even mob justice. I choose not to be offended by mannc calling me a Nazi, for example, even though it's a reprehensible thing to say, but except in situations of clear libel (calling me such with the intention of causing harm) I would be completely against any attempt to prevent him from calling me a Nazi.
Augie Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 Actually, there's nothing in the CBA that prevents it. Players are basically contractors, not employees, and can be (and are) dismissed for conduct detrimental to the franchise. The literal wording is "you have engaged in personal conduct which, in the reasonable judgement of the Club, adversely affects or reflects on the Club." I would expect that any attempt at that would be challenged through arbitration to the courts (or NLRB), solely on the definition of "reasonable," which for better or worse is not defined in the CBA. But yes, a team can absolutely cut a player for protesting. What's so obvious? That speech is speech, and the principles of the First Amendment and equal protection do not include any qualifiers for content? People have a hard time with that, because they believe that people have an inalienable right to not be offended. Which they do...but only as a matter of personal choice, not government policy, or even mob justice. I choose not to be offended by mannc calling me a Nazi, for example, even though it's a reprehensible thing to say, but except in situations of clear libel (calling me such with the intention of causing harm) I would be completely against any attempt to prevent him from calling me a Nazi. I was agreeing with you.
DC Tom Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 I was agreeing with you. I suspected...but I honestly wasn't sure. And used it as an opportunity to expound on why it's so hard for some people. People don't understand that "I'm offended" isn't something done to you, it's a choice you make for yourself.
Augie Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 I suspected...but I honestly wasn't sure. And used it as an opportunity to expound on why it's so hard for some people. People don't understand that "I'm offended" isn't something done to you, it's a choice you make for yourself. I was talking with some guys at the park this week, and one guy was saying "what if he did it to raise awareness for breast cancer research" (which of course makes no sense!). I said I don't care, it's not YOUR place to bring up YOUR agenda. So now for the umpteenth time I'll mention the slippery slope. I don't care what your agenda is, shut up and do your job while you're at work.
Rob's House Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 When I worked for a publicly traded bank I was pulled off the floor by a manager and told that I'd been overheard having a private conversation with a coworker speaking negatively about Obama and that it was not acceptable in the workplace. I wonder if mannchild would take up my cause.
Game Manager Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 (edited) Didn't read the last 10 pages but I have to give it up for mannc pretending that Kap's still a good qb. Disregard his 1-10 record last year because race and stuff Edited October 19, 2017 by Game Manager
boyst Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 One thing I'm amazed to not see is a popular anonymous vote of how many players support kneeling and the demonstrations vs those who are opposed. And no, I'd not buy an ESPN poll. I think the reason we haven't seen one touted is because a good % of players are against it and it goes against the media infatuation and narrative.
mead107 Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 (edited) Kaepernick gives classes in the inner cities on knowing your rights when a pig (police officer) stops you. First thing is, am I free to go? https://www.thenation.com/article/colin-kaepernicks-message-to-chicago-youth-know-your-rights/ http://kaepernick7.com/know-your-rights-camp/ At least he is working with kids. Edited October 19, 2017 by mead107
Gugny Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 Kaepernick gives classes in the inner cities on knowing your rights when a pig (police officer) stops you. First thing is, am I free to go? https://www.thenation.com/article/colin-kaepernicks-message-to-chicago-youth-know-your-rights/ http://kaepernick7.com/know-your-rights-camp/ At least he is working with kids. Funny (actually, it's not) ... the word "pig" isn't in either one of those articles. Why would you write that word? I'll tell you why ... to start schit. That's why. Why would anyone have a problem with teaching children their rights as American citizens at an early age?
boyst Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 Funny (actually, it's not) ... the word "pig" isn't in either one of those articles. Why would you write that word? I'll tell you why ... to start schit. That's why. Why would anyone have a problem with teaching children their rights as American citizens at an early age? because he's a fraud. It is personal with many.
Gugny Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 because he's a fraud. It is personal with many. A fraud? He seems to be walking the walk, to me. He seems to be putting his money where his mouth is. He seems to be doing a lot more to improve things than - I'd estimate - 90% of the people speaking against him. One might not agree with his beliefs. One might think the injustices he speaks about aren't real. But to call him a fraud? He's as genuine as genuine gets, in my opinion. Do I agree with everything he's done? Absolutely not. But I will opine that he's done more good for this country in the past couple years (and then some) than most do in a lifetime.
boyst Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 A fraud? He seems to be walking the walk, to me. He seems to be putting his money where his mouth is. He seems to be doing a lot more to improve things than - I'd estimate - 90% of the people speaking against him. One might not agree with his beliefs. One might think the injustices he speaks about aren't real. But to call him a fraud? He's as genuine as genuine gets, in my opinion. Do I agree with everything he's done? Absolutely not. But I will opine that he's done more good for this country in the past couple years (and then some) than most do in a lifetime. he used his mouth before he used his actions. Speaking up, pig socks etc. That's a douchebag move. He filed a lawsuit that will get no where, douchebag move. He'll be a martyr for it, though. He had opportunities to play this year and squandered them. Dumbass move. He has yet to lead a serious discussion on the matter and allowed himself to be bent over and whored out on the matter. And, he is full of **** - dude grew up priveleged and is now worth ko Simpsons. Yes,he is a fraud.
Gugny Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 he used his mouth before he used his actions. Speaking up, pig socks etc. That's a douchebag move. He filed a lawsuit that will get no where, douchebag move. He'll be a martyr for it, though. He had opportunities to play this year and squandered them. Dumbass move. He has yet to lead a serious discussion on the matter and allowed himself to be bent over and whored out on the matter. And, he is full of **** - dude grew up priveleged and is now worth ko Simpsons. Yes,he is a fraud. He still grew up black. The fact that he didn't grow up poor means nothing. I agree that the socks and the Castro shirt were a-hole moves. I agree re: the lawsuit. I do believe, however, that he's had a lot of serious discussions about a lot of serious issues over the years. We can/should respectfully agree to disagree about whether or not he's a fraud.
boyst Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 He still grew up black. The fact that he didn't grow up poor means nothing. I agree that the socks and the Castro shirt were a-hole moves. I agree re: the lawsuit. I do believe, however, that he's had a lot of serious discussions about a lot of serious issues over the years. We can/should respectfully agree to disagree about whether or not he's a fraud. growing up black doesn't entitled or remove one bit of experience to anyone unless one chooses to allow it to be so. There is no way I believe in this day and age that it is a factor with the constructs of our social systems. By you saying this it is a perceived racism that being a black child is a negative issue.
Gugny Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 growing up black doesn't entitled or remove one bit of experience to anyone unless one chooses to allow it to be so. There is no way I believe in this day and age that it is a factor with the constructs of our social systems. By you saying this it is a perceived racism that being a black child is a negative issue. This floors me. In the interest of protecting myself from getting banned, I'm letting this conversation go with no further comment.
HardyBoy Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 (edited) Let's try a hypothetical that actually bears a resemblance to the actual: a group of white supremacist NFL players want to protest the fact that there are, in their opinion, too many laws and regulations benefiting minorities (scholarships, hate crime laws, affirmative action, EEOC, etc.) at the expense of whites, and want to protest the fact by performing some sort of peaceful pre-game demonstration. Because THAT - protesting government/social policy not related to the league during league events - is an accurate hypothetical. And in that hypothetical, I absolutely would expect the league to provide for their protest to the same degree that they allow any other protest. Because I care about the principles of equal protection and freedom of speech, even for those that I vehemently disagree with, disparage, and loathe. What if the response to the above is affirmative action laws are in respone to existing laws and societal norms that give whites an unfair initial advantage? Therefore, given that, the analogy is not truly analogous, since the intial protest is directly protesting what the second protest would be trying to preserve. Edited October 19, 2017 by HardyBoy
RoyBatty is alive Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 A fraud? He seems to be walking the walk, to me. He seems to be putting his money where his mouth is. He seems to be doing a lot more to improve things than - I'd estimate - 90% of the people speaking against him. One might not agree with his beliefs. One might think the injustices he speaks about aren't real. But to call him a fraud? He's as genuine as genuine gets, in my opinion. Do I agree with everything he's done? Absolutely not. But I will opine that he's done more good for this country in the past couple years (and then some) than most do in a lifetime. Exactly what "good" has he done. Let me think, changed any racists minds? LOL of course not. All he has done is divided an even more fractured country.
boyst Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 (edited) Exactly what "good" has he done. Let me think, changed any racists minds? LOL of course not. All he has done is divided an even more fractured country. an argument could be made that the division of such would create a stronger environment going forward. But I have little faith that someone of Kaepernicks lowly being could do this when even the President could not. Best you can hope for is to live and let live Edited October 19, 2017 by Boyst62
mead107 Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 (edited) Funny (actually, it's not) ... the word "pig" isn't in either one of those articles. Why would you write that word? I'll tell you why ... to start schit. That's why. Why would anyone have a problem with teaching children their rights as American citizens at an early age? I used it because he had on pig socks at practice last year. So you approve of that? Do you have your pig socks and underwear on? Lol A fraud? He seems to be walking the walk, to me. He seems to be putting his money where his mouth is. He seems to be doing a lot more to improve things than - I'd estimate - 90% of the people speaking against him. One might not agree with his beliefs. One might think the injustices he speaks about aren't real. But to call him a fraud? He's as genuine as genuine gets, in my opinion. Do I agree with everything he's done? Absolutely not. But I will opine that he's done more good for this country in the past couple years (and then some) than most do in a lifetime. how come he brings in no police officers in with him for better relationship in inner cities Edited October 19, 2017 by mead107
nucci Posted October 19, 2017 Posted October 19, 2017 Didn't read the last 10 pages but I have to give it up for mannc pretending that Kap's still a good qb. Disregard his 1-10 record last year because race and stuff because a QB W-L record is a true barometer of his ability
Recommended Posts