[News] NHL suspends Voynov indefinitely after domestic violence arrest. Upd: Voynov charged

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Oh I'm sure they'd love to.

If they do, and I was Richards, I would be suing their balls off.

what would you sue them for?

If he indeed breached his contract, LA is well within his rights. He would have to show that he is being discriminated for something such as racial discrimination under US labour laws:
http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/

Not terminating someone else's contract?

[gunsmoke]

Not sure if mentioned, but Voynov is also recuperating from an achilles tear in April. It was non-hockey related, so he has to recover from that as well before being reinstated. My view is that a plea to misdemeanor means that he should be able to continue playing in the NHL, but will have to adhere to any and all probation requirements. Crossing the border is also an issue, but I imagine there will be a work around for that as well. For fantasy sake, I am still wondering whether I should make a low-ball trade for him..

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

what would you sue them for?

If he indeed breached his contract, LA is well within his rights. He would have to show that he is being discriminated for something such as racial discrimination under US labour laws:
http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/

Not terminating someone else's contract?

On possibly the same grounds? Yeah.

So let's say you got fired for doing something illegal. Fine, fair enough.

A few weeks later, your work buddy is charged and convicted of something illegal as well, something that is likely quite a bit worse than Richards. You're telling me you wouldn't be talking to a lawyer about that?

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by MattyC

On possibly the same grounds? Yeah.

So let's say you got fired for doing something illegal. Fine, fair enough.

A few weeks later, your work buddy is charged and convicted of something illegal as well, something that is likely quite a bit worse than Richards. You're telling me you wouldn't be talking to a lawyer about that?

What would you be suing them for, specifically?

If its wrongful termination, it has to be something specific according to the US labour laws.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

What would you be suing them for, specifically?

If its wrongful termination, it has to be something specific according to the US labour laws.

Honestly have no idea, specifically. That's why I'd be talking to a lawyer.

But yea, wrongful dismissal sounds right. Not on the grounds that he didn't breach his contract. But that the Kings are using the wording in the contract subjectively. You could probably make the case, based on the fact that Voynov is retained for breaking the same clause, that he was dismissed purely due to his contract status.

I have no idea if that has any legal grounds at all (again, hence the lawyers), but it seems like something like that would have a judge raising their eyebrows.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Rich Hammond ‏@Rich_Hammond
NHL's Bill Daly, on Voynov: "Nothing changes with regard to his status vis-a-vis the NHL. No timetables for next steps. ..." [more]

Rich Hammond ‏@Rich_Hammond
More Daly on Voynov: "I imagine we will hear from the Player's camp and the PA when they are ready to engage." [end]

Rich Hammond ‏@Rich_Hammond
In other words, Voynov remains suspended by NHL.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Honestly have no idea, specifically. That's why I'd be talking to a lawyer.

But yea, wrongful dismissal sounds right. Not on the grounds that he didn't breach his contract. But that the Kings are using the wording in the contract subjectively. You could probably make the case, based on the fact that Voynov is retained for breaking the same clause, that he was dismissed purely due to his contract status.

I have no idea if that has any legal grounds at all (again, hence the lawyers), but it seems like something like that would have a judge raising their eyebrows.

Without a doubt, Voynov's contract could be terminated. Its just their choice whether to or not.

Most employment contracts (not sure about pro athlete) have a "employment is at will" in their contract, meaning that an employer can terminate the contract at any time without cause. Employers will probably find a suitable justification just in case it ever goes to court, but the "at will" gives them proper grounds. (I remember asking my recent job offer contract what that means)

I really have trouble thinking of something Richards could sue for, and what he would sue for? Is it to terminate Voynov's contract?

I think the equivalent you are saying is something like getting caught for speeding, then sueing the city because there are other people that are driving even faster and get away with it.

In the end, I think its all for not as I imagine Voynov's contract will be terminated... I can't imagine LA/Lombardi is very happy with this gong show of Voynov, Stoll and now Richards.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

I think the equivalent you are saying is something like getting caught for speeding, then sueing the city because there are other people that are driving even faster and get away with it.

Yeah I get all of what your saying, but this part isn't equivalent IMO. The Kings know of Voynov's (ie the other drivers) issue and have the opportunity to punish him in the same way as Richards. In the case of speeding drivers, it is unknown who they are or how fast they were going. In this case, the do know who they are and how fast they were going and didn't.

It would be more like you get pulled over by a cop for going 20 over, he gives you a ticket. Fine, fair enough. Then at the same time he pulls over a guy going 50 over, but because he likes his car (or the way he plays) he decides not to ticket him. If you were witness to that you would be right pissed and I think you would have grounds to go after the officer/city, as long as you could prove everything.

[mkd_087]

Frankly you need to be careful and consistent with messaging. If they went ahead to terminate Richards' contract due to drug smuggling or whatever it was, then they sure as hell should do the same for someone who you would physically assault his wife/girlfriend. What message, again, would that send?

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Just imagine if beating up women was a breach of contract they could wash their hands of him and void his contract like Richards being addicted to pain killers.

Why would the Kings do that?
When he does play, he's a valuable asset with that contract.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by MattyC

On possibly the same grounds? Yeah.

So let's say you got fired for doing something illegal. Fine, fair enough.

A few weeks later, your work buddy is charged and convicted of something illegal as well, something that is likely quite a bit worse than Richards. You're telling me you wouldn't be talking to a lawyer about that?

FWIW, Richards has to go through the CBA mandated appeals/arbitration process. I'm not sure he even has the right to sue. One of those nice things about the collective bargaining process.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Without a doubt, Voynov's contract could be terminated. Its just their choice whether to or not.

Most employment contracts (not sure about pro athlete) have a "employment is at will" in their contract, meaning that an employer can terminate the contract at any time without cause. Employers will probably find a suitable justification just in case it ever goes to court, but the "at will" gives them proper grounds. (I remember asking my recent job offer contract what that means) .

The big difference is that you are also free to quit and go work for another company in the same industry at any time (a non-compete clause could add some restrictions on that, but those restrictions would need to be limited to a reasonable geographical area and for a reasonable amount of time), but NHL hockey players can't just give 2 weeks notice and then go play for another team. The more free that an employee is to end their relationship with their employer, the more free that the employer is to end their relationship with the employee, but few employees in the world are more restricted in their ability to leave their employer are than professional athletes. That's why few employers in the world are more restricted in their ability to terminate contracts than is the NHL.

[sureLoss]

Here comes the Putinization:

Gabrielle T-F @gabrielletf
Sovetsky Sport on #Voynov case: "U.S. laws are so strict and unpredictable that they are very difficult for a Russian to understand."

[Resolute 14]

Yeah, "don't beat your wife" is certainly a difficult one to figure out. Easy to see how Russians would struggle with that one...

[speede5]

He has admitted to the wrong doing.
He will serve the time.
He will complete the courses.
He will be on a short leash.

I don't see how you couldn't reinstate him after all that. Maybe a years suspension would be justifiable, but I'd think it's tough to blackball a guy if he takes the right steps.

Additionally, the league should be auditing the LA organization, 3 incidents in a couple months, there may need to be some cultural changes in that locker room.

[Ice]

Originally Posted by speede5

He has admitted to the wrong doing.
He will serve the time.
He will complete the courses.
He will be on a short leash.

I don't see how you couldn't reinstate him after all that. Maybe a years suspension would be justifiable, but I'd think it's tough to blackball a guy if he takes the right steps.

Additionally, the league should be auditing the LA organization, 3 incidents in a couple months, there may need to be some cultural changes in that locker room.

The cultural change needs to come from the league, not just one team. If you are under the impression that drug abuse isn't an issue for players on every single team in the league, you're being naive. It starts in Juniors and gets worse once these guys have large salaries and plenty of money to spend to feed their habit. Sure, two Kings players got caught, within months of each other, but every locker room in the league has this problem to varying degrees.

[sureLoss]

Voynov only expected to serve 45 days or less. Article states he enterd on July 7, should be out around August 20.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sports...729-story.html

[foshizzle11]

Interesting. What happens now after he serves? Will he be at the Kings camp in September?

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by foshizzle11

Interesting. What happens now after he serves? Will he be at the Kings camp in September?

Well I guess if he serves his time and repays his "debt to society" then he should be able to legally work again. If the Kings refuse to let him work, wouldn't that be some type of discrimination?

As an agent with a contract though, that contract could be traded if they don't want him on his team anymore.

[Weitz]

I'm sure he will be back and playing again next year.