Quote:
Originally Posted by Goriders
I could see alot of players wondering what would happen to their career if they were in a situation where they might be wrongly accused by someone and that they would want to be able to continue their career if found not guilty.
|
This is 100% the reason why the NHLPA are challenging the NHL’s decision. The PA can’t force the league to allow these players to play or to sign them to new contracts so it has nothing to do with getting the players their jobs back. They have to protect the rights of their other players(who probably largely hate the world junior players involved for what they did) and this could set a bad precedent.
It doesn’t help that the league has already brought back the likes of Bowman, Quenville and MacIsaac, because it gives these players a strong argument that the league’s action in their case are arbitrary.
As does the Corey Perry and the Blackhawks contract cancellation.
https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/...ry-termination
What’s important in the Perry example is that no grievance was filed and the league still agreed to a (undisclosed) settlement, which suggests they knew there was some legal obligation owed to a player in a situation where their contract was being cancelled, even if they may have arguably had just cause. My guess is that something similar happens in this case if any of these players still have any years left on their existing contracts(don’t know if that’s the case of not). Personally I doubt these guys are all(if any) going to be signed by teams even if they are made eligible.
Public statements like this from the commissioner aren’t hurting the case for those players either(from the Perry article linked above):
Quote:
|
"He took a little time away," Bettman said. "In the final analysis, clubs will decide what they're comfortable with to a certain extent and what they're not, and in this case the Blackhawks decided it was best if he was away from the team."
|
The insinuations by some in this thread that by challenging the league’s decision it must mean the PA condones the actions of the players seem to stem from a lack of understanding of the ramifications for all of the other players and their rights as employees of the league. The acquitted players aren’t going to be back playing in the league if the NHL, its franchise owners or GMs don’t want them to be, they hold all the cards on that one.
But if those players are legally entitled to some form of compensation or to be eligible to sign with a team(even if no one will sign them) then it is what it is, the same would apply if they aren’t legally entitled to anything. If they are though, all of the other PA members would have an interest in protecting that. I don’t think the league has done itself any favours to defend their current stance with how they as an employer have
voluntarily handled similar situations with employees who didn’t have a Union for anyone to blame for them being allowed to work in the league again
My personal feelings about the actions of the players, quenville, bowman, etc don’t really matter when it comes to whether they can or can’t be hired by the league. My personal feelings do however impact where I as a potential customer spend my money though. Frankly I’d rather see no restrictions on hiring so I’m in a better position to decide whether I want to give my money to a business based on their natural choices instead of PR moves put in place because maybe they don’t want me to see what their natural choices would be.