Quote:
Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen
We're not talking about a little incident that could be handled in days. The arguments that the NHLPA and its experts brought up have huge, long lasting ramifications to the league. If you think it's an easy decision, I ask you the core question in this case. Should players be responsible for their actions if they have, or are diagnosed with, a concussion?
The fact that the neutral third party arbitrator has also taken substantial time only goes to justify the NHL's slower undertaking.
Look, I'm not saying that there isn't room for improvement. Maybe skipping the Bettman step completely would make sense for a more expedited process in future cases like this but this isn't a simple case that should be solved within a couple days. Read the decision, read the NHLPA's argument with regards to concussion (and the reason they went to the third-party) and understand the consequences.
|
Why is this continually coming up? The neutral arbitrator does not work for the NHL and his decision has no bearing on any future legal ramifications the league faces. These guys are CBA mediators who specialize in ensuring the workplace disputes get sorted out fairly.
Think about a union trucking company. A driver didn't get paid some overtime hours and went to his shop stewart. The dispute eventually goes to an arbitrator who works at arms length to the provincial labour agency. The arbitrator's decision doesn't have a bearing on later law suites from former employees who file a sexual harassment claim.
Wideman is disputing a punishment decision. That's different than a law suit about safety standards (ie, concussion prevention).