Quote:
Originally Posted by FanIn80
Because innocent until proven guilty is still the law.
Let's say someone publicly accuses you of something you didn't do. Your employer cares more about public opinion than than they do about you, so they fire you (because in the private sector, there's no such thing as "suspending you with pay" for the 5+ years it can take to resolve things).
You can't get another job anywhere else either, becasue in order to aqcuire the public opinion they wanted, they had to publicly announce they've fired you. Now you're untouchable because imagine what happens when the public finds out a new company has hired you? What kind of taste does that leave in your mouth?
Ps. "The public" is thousands of people like yourself (and many others in this thread) who clamour for someone's career to end the second an accusation is made.
(Disclaimer: I'm not commenting on the innocence or guilt of anyone invloved with whatever's happening in this story, so keep your pitchforks to yourselves.)
|
Yeah but in these instances, they CAN be suspended with pay, so why not take that route? Maybe it never amounts into anything, and you return them to the active roster. You could argue reputational damage for future contracts, then a team can just rebut that your play is what hurt your future contracts.
I get what everyone is saying that employers can't jump the gun, and we also don't know what the players were or were not telling the teams. Likely on the side of less info, so maybe Ottawa really was the only team that had enough info to act. We'll probably never know, which is why the speculation runs rampant!