[News] Bill Peters resigns as head coach. No longer part of Flames org. Ward interim HC

[Enoch Root]

Pretty hard to fire someone for something they did 10 years ago under contract with another organization.

I was involved in a situation today where an employee was caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar - 100% caught dead to rights. Yet we still didn't fire her because the laws favour the employee so much. Easier just to pay a reduced severance and move on.

(yes I know the Peters contract is not the same as employee law, but the point remains)

[rhino]

[QUOTE=Enoch Root;7302604]Pretty hard to fire someone for something they did 10 years ago under contract with another organization.

I was involved in a situation today where an employee was caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar - 100% caught dead to rights. Yet we still didn't fire her because the laws favour the employee so much. Easier just to pay a reduced severance and move on.

(yes I know the Peters contract is not the same as employee law.

I don’t think it was an easy thing for Treliving to do but once the facts were confirmed I think it was an easy decision. When your revenue depends on ticket sales you don’t keep a perceived racist as your coach.

[Mr.Coffee]

Bettman’s comments strike me as weird and paternalistic. I get he has a league to run and these types of situations occupy bad press but to outright say that private organizations need to conduct more thorough due diligence is sort of weird. Sort of alludes to the fact that Calgary did not. Also, how is that supposed to functionally work, Gary? Did you think about things like reality before rolling out that line? “Well Bill we are almost done here but just curious, are you a racist? Yes? Oh dear- sorry you almost snuck through the cracks here.” I now await contrarians to tell me that Treliving was supposed to contact every ex-player Peters ever coached.

Above, combined with the seemingly arrogant presumption that everybody’s first mode of business has to be lightning quick phone calls to Gary Bettman the moment something off comes to light, that entire outlay he just made in reference to the Bill Peters situation comes across as overreaching for the NHL. Obviously they need to be notified but I’m sure Brads very first thoughts were making sure Gary knew every single detail as he sorted out what could only be described as a total cluster****. Bettman and his arrogant assumptions, which actually is par for the course for these guys running this league based on history, so maybe shouldn’t be too surprising.

[GioforPM]

I think Bettman was saying Calgary acted as fast as it could. I think he was predicting that clubs would naturally start to do a lot more background check, just as a prediction .

As for notifying the league, he’s entitled to set those rules so he did.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Behind the curtains settlement for a resignation?

A lot of folks have been hyper critical of that. Some believe it's a sweeping it under the rug. I dont think it is as it's a bit of a opening of a can of worms if you drop the guillotine without thought.

Situation unfolded the best it could IMO.

Well absolutely that’s what it was. And I’m not going to be critical of the organization since they inherited this mess but that doesn’t mean I don’t wish that Treliving had stepped up to the podium and said “I have informed Bill Peters that his services as head coach of the Calgary Flames hockey club will no longer be required.”

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Bettman’s comments strike me as weird and paternalistic. I get he has a league to run and these types of situations occupy bad press but to outright say that private organizations need to conduct more thorough due diligence is sort of weird. Sort of alludes to the fact that Calgary did not. Also, how is that supposed to functionally work, Gary? Did you think about things like reality before rolling out that line? “Well Bill we are almost done here but just curious, are you a racist? Yes? Oh dear- sorry you almost snuck through the cracks here.” I now await contrarians to tell me that Treliving was supposed to contact every ex-player Peters ever coached.

Above, combined with the seemingly arrogant presumption that everybody’s first mode of business has to be lightning quick phone calls to Gary Bettman the moment something off comes to light, that entire outlay he just made in reference to the Bill Peters situation comes across as overreaching for the NHL. Obviously they need to be notified but I’m sure Brads very first thoughts were making sure Gary knew every single detail as he sorted out what could only be described as a total cluster****. Bettman and his arrogant assumptions, which actually is par for the course for these guys running this league based on history, so maybe shouldn’t be too surprising.

Well, if you ask the question (probably more delicately) and facts emerge showing the candidate had such a background, your grounds for dismissal get a lot clearer.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Statement from Bettman at the BOG. Also outlines how the NHL is planning on preventing future situations.

https://media.nhl.com/public/news/13656?sf113947969=1

I do like that someone finally stood up and had Treliving's back on this.

A day late and a dollar short, but nonetheless.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Locke

I do like that someone finally stood up and had Treliving's back on this.



A day late and a dollar short, but nonetheless.

Honestly it looked painful for him to give the Flames any kudos.

[curves2000]

Where are the players in this? As I had stated in other threads, the standards have been set. Racist, homophobic and improper behavior are not suppose to be tolerated on a go forward basis. Using the Peter's situation, you lose your employment in the NHL, end of story!!

Or are we looking at a situation where the odd lower level ranking employee might be disciplined or fired but the superstars of the league get away with a slap on the wrist? If the players are the face of the game and they are also the revenue generators, shouldn't they be at the forefront of this new movement? Don't you need to send an example that the NHL means business when it comes to these things?

Or are we looking at everybody's meal ticket being safe and get away with a couple of games suspension and some "sensitivity training"??

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Pretty hard to fire someone for something they did 10 years ago under contract with another organization.

I was involved in a situation today where an employee was caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar - 100% caught dead to rights. Yet we still didn't fire her because the laws favour the employee so much. Easier just to pay a reduced severance and move on.

(yes I know the Peters contract is not the same as employee law, but the point remains)

Actually it’s not that hard when you realize the nature of the industry involved and that the decision was made because the other option was flooding the business and its partners with negative press which would eventually impact the bottom line of the business.

The fact that you’re not disclosing the details of this incident proves that your line of work is completely different that the public interaction and public relationship the NHL has.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Pretty hard to fire someone for something they did 10 years ago under contract with another organization.

I was involved in a situation today where an employee was caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar - 100% caught dead to rights. Yet we still didn't fire her because the laws favour the employee so much. Easier just to pay a reduced severance and move on.

(yes I know the Peters contract is not the same as employee law, but the point remains)

Why are you paying severance if you didn’t fire her?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Where are the players in this? As I had stated in other threads, the standards have been set. Racist, homophobic and improper behavior are not suppose to be tolerated on a go forward basis. Using the Peter's situation, you lose your employment in the NHL, end of story!!

Or are we looking at a situation where the odd lower level ranking employee might be disciplined or fired but the superstars of the league get away with a slap on the wrist? If the players are the face of the game and they are also the revenue generators, shouldn't they be at the forefront of this new movement? Don't you need to send an example that the NHL means business when it comes to these things?

Or are we looking at everybody's meal ticket being safe and get away with a couple of games suspension and some "sensitivity training"??

What?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Why are you paying severance if you didn’t fire her?

I think he means they didn't fire for cause, which would mean no severance.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I think he means they didn't fire for cause, which would mean no severance.

He says "we still didn't fire her". But perhaps you're right.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

^ lol

Cute. How do you think it looks on you when you feel the need to take time to dig up and copy and paste a bunch of my replies to people?

When you were doing that did you ask yourself any illuminating questions?

Haha

Just to close the loop on this for you, my page views are set to the max 60/page...I'm sure that scrolling through one page and clicking the multi-quote button on each of your [many] posts took me less than a minute.

I'll let you get back to your important work of critiquing anyone who dares to question the status quo.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Where are the players in this? As I had stated in other threads, the standards have been set. Racist, homophobic and improper behavior are not suppose to be tolerated on a go forward basis. Using the Peter's situation, you lose your employment in the NHL, end of story!!

What do you mean by “improper behaviour” ? Like not saying “good morning” in the elevator?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Why are you paying severance if you didn’t fire her?

let go instead of fired - it's an easier path

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

What?

Sorry I am a little under the weather and was up in the middle of the night so my thoughts might not have been properly articulated.

What I am wondering is what are the standards for the new personal conduct policy and why is nothing really geared towards players conduct? The new policy covers a whole host of front office staff but doesn't really cover NHL players, ie: the money makers.

If NHL coaches and front office personal are going to be severely disciplined with this new policy, I assume we are looking at loss of employment if and when additional allegations come out via current and former players.

If the goal of the policy is root out racism, abusive behavior, improper conduct or whatever anybody wants to call it, why doesn't this apply to players?

The thing I always find interesting when it comes to certain aspirational or societal changes is looking at who really ends up footing the bill.

Sure the NHL can fire some coaches and some assistant managers, these are replaceable positions. What will the NHL do if allegations come out against players? Like I stated earlier, the money makers. Does the NHL have the guts to banish a superstar in Toronto if a massage therapist in Montreal who used to work for the Leafs come out with an allegation? Does this mean a 3 game suspension or are you done in the league?

What will happen if a player makes an allegation of racism, homophobia or improper conduct about another player? If an Edmonton Oiler made certain allegations against one of our beloved Flames, would the same amount of posters be on board for a very long and punishing suspension or banishment in the league?

I guess we will all see how serious everybody takes this or if they are just paying lip service

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Sorry I am a little under the weather and was up in the middle of the night so my thoughts might not have been properly articulated.

What I am wondering is what are the standards for the new personal conduct policy and why is nothing really geared towards players conduct? The new policy covers a whole host of front office staff but doesn't really cover NHL players, ie: the money makers.

If NHL coaches and front office personal are going to be severely disciplined with this new policy, I assume we are looking at loss of employment if and when additional allegations come out via current and former players.

If the goal of the policy is root out racism, abusive behavior, improper conduct or whatever anybody wants to call it, why doesn't this apply to players?

The thing I always find interesting when it comes to certain aspirational or societal changes is looking at who really ends up footing the bill.

Sure the NHL can fire some coaches and some assistant managers, these are replaceable positions. What will the NHL do if allegations come out against players? Like I stated earlier, the money makers. Does the NHL have the guts to banish a superstar in Toronto if a massage therapist in Montreal who used to work for the Leafs come out with an allegation? Does this mean a 3 game suspension or are you done in the league?

What will happen if a player makes an allegation of racism, homophobia or improper conduct about another player? If an Edmonton Oiler made certain allegations against one of our beloved Flames, would the same amount of posters be on board for a very long and punishing suspension or banishment in the league?

I guess we will all see how serious everybody takes this or if they are just paying lip service

A big difference you appear to miss is that the coach is in a position of power over the player. Would you hold a student who abuses a fellow student to the same standard as a teacher who abuses a student? I would hope not.

Seems you are looking to manufacture hypocrisy.

[Kidder]

Some people gripe about these coaches being relieved of the positions of power they’ve abused. But ultimately it’s a very positive step.

Geoff Ward is 57, has a ton of coaching experience, ostensibly a great person, and is finally getting a crack at an NHL head coach gig (and so far running with it).

There are a lot of quality coaches and people who deserve a shot at the highest level. Out with crusty curmudgeon dinosaurs like Crawford, let in some new blood that don’t rely on power plays or mental games to be effective.

There will not be a shortage of deserving NHL bench bosses.