New Movement to Ban Everyone Who Has Been accused of DV from Professional Sports

[Kidlicious]

Why don't you all have avatars like MRT? You can stop domestic violence.

[loinburger]

Robocop is usually more concerned with shutting down Nuke production

[Imran Siddiqui]

Like what Imran? Are you just saying stuff to say stuff?

Do they wait for convictions before suspending people for drug use?

Ray Rice's proof of domestic violence was just as valid as a drug test showing that a player was doing pot.

[kentonio]

No. Apparently Kidicious believes that White Knights are opposed to wife beating because they are concerned primarily with chivalry and not y'know, basic decency.

If you're a wifebeater, I don't want you on my fantasy team.

You're a moron and the worst person I know.

That was really wierd. For about the first time ever I read a Ben post and thought 'wow, we actually agree on something'. Then you chose that post to call him a moron and the worst person you know. I mean both those things are obviously true, but about this post? Nah..

[-Jrabbit]

The problem with the "wait for the legal outcome" approach is that even a simple DUI can take well over a year to be resolved. Lawyers can delay and then plead out a case to avoid an obvious but undesirable outcome. And apparently, the league is OK with that.

Hell, just challenging a drug test outcome can allow a multiple seasons of participation. Example: The "Williams Wall" - defensive linemen Kevin and Pat Williams (no relation) of the Minnesota Vikings - failed their NFL drug test (for diuretics, known as masking agents for steroids) in 2008. By rule, they were each suspended for 4 games by the league prior to the 2009 season.

Then the lawsuits began.

By the time the Minnesota Supreme Court declined to consider yet another appeal, it was 2011. So the pair got to play two entire seasons without a resolution to a simple PED test executed under the league's collective bargaining agreement. Good for the players? Sure. Fair for Minnesota's opponents? Not at all.

Pat Williams retired after the 2010 season as a 14-year veteran. He never served any suspension.
Kevin Williams' suspension happened in 2011, but was reduced to 2 games -- under terms of the new CBA that was then in place.

And that's just procedural stuff, collectively agreed upon by both players and management. Legal stuff is even nastier, can last longer, and subverts the idea behind behavioral expectations inherent in any NFL contract - which does have a "morals" clause - by casting the legal system in the role of decider.

The league has a long history of sweeping ugly incidents under the rug. They need to come to terms with the fact that we live in a much more transparent world today. Ray Rice knew he was busted. The league still thought they could make it go away.

It could well be that Ray Rice is a great guy who has never done anything like this to anyone else, ever. But that doesn't change the video evidence. Nor does it change the fact that the league and the Ravens then embarked on a campaign of denial - including victim-shaming and "disaster PR" consultants - that would never have been offered to a random backup at the end of the roster.

The NFL needs to get its house in order.

[Hauldren Collider]

What is this ****ing bull**** you're spewing? This is the kind arbitrary labor decision YOU support. This has to be the one time I've ever seen you take the side of labor over management and I have to wonder if it's due to the fact the labor are also millionaires. Or you're just an apologist for domestic violence, but I'm feeling generous today.

Wait, what? I'm confused. I think you may be misunderstanding me. What exactly is it you think I support?

EDIT: Oh, I see. OK, let me clarify. I agree the NFL/teams in the NFL should be allowed to fire their players for whatever the hell they want, whenever the hell they want. But I personally think it's unfair to the players to punish them before they've had a trial.

[Hauldren Collider]

Also worth pointing out: It isn't an employer's job to mete out punishment for crimes, it's the government's job.

[Kidlicious]

Do they wait for convictions before suspending people for drug use?

Ray Rice's proof of domestic violence was just as valid as a drug test showing that a player was doing pot.

Can I just tell the NFL that I smoked a joint with Peyton Manning because I don't like the Broncos?

[kentonio]

I agree the NFL/teams in the NFL should be allowed to fire their players for whatever the hell they want, whenever the hell they want.

Jesus christ, how do you people live knowing that your boss could just fire you any time they felt the urge and for no actual reason? Is that not stressful as hell when you have rent/mortgages to pay?

[Lorizael]

Also worth pointing out: It isn't an employer's job to mete out punishment for crimes, it's the government's job.

Which is why managers wait for the conclusion of a trial before firing employees they find stealing from the cash register.

[ZEE]

Loss-Prevention on a corporate level has the ability to fire employees without a trial with sufficient evidence.

[Hauldren Collider]

The problem with the "wait for the legal outcome" approach is that even a simple DUI can take well over a year to be resolved. Lawyers can delay and then plead out a case to avoid an obvious but undesirable outcome. And apparently, the league is OK with that.

Hell, just challenging a drug test outcome can allow a multiple seasons of participation. Example: The "Williams Wall" - defensive linemen Kevin and Pat Williams (no relation) of the Minnesota Vikings - failed their NFL drug test (for diuretics, known as masking agents for steroids) in 2008. By rule, they were each suspended for 4 games by the league prior to the 2009 season.

Then the lawsuits began.

By the time the Minnesota Supreme Court declined to consider yet another appeal, it was 2011. So the pair got to play two entire seasons without a resolution to a simple PED test executed under the league's collective bargaining agreement. Good for the players? Sure. Fair for Minnesota's opponents? Not at all.

Pat Williams retired after the 2010 season as a 14-year veteran. He never served any suspension.
Kevin Williams' suspension happened in 2011, but was reduced to 2 games -- under terms of the new CBA that was then in place.

And that's just procedural stuff, collectively agreed upon by both players and management. Legal stuff is even nastier, can last longer, and subverts the idea behind behavioral expectations inherent in any NFL contract - which does have a "morals" clause - by casting the legal system in the role of decider.

The league has a long history of sweeping ugly incidents under the rug. They need to come to terms with the fact that we live in a much more transparent world today. Ray Rice knew he was busted. The league still thought they could make it go away.

It could well be that Ray Rice is a great guy who has never done anything like this to anyone else, ever. But that doesn't change the video evidence. Nor does it change the fact that the league and the Ravens then embarked on a campaign of denial - including victim-shaming and "disaster PR" consultants - that would never have been offered to a random backup at the end of the roster.

The NFL needs to get its house in order.

TLDR: The legal system takes too long to determine if someone is guilty of felonies. We should issue mob justice to remedy this.

Let me give you a corollary: Imagine an NFL player accused of a crime who is later found innocent. Because we didn't just fire him and ruin his career over allegations, he gets to keep playing and keep making money in his chosen profession.
Alternatively: We assume guilt and his life is ruined despite no wrongdoing whatsoever.

I absolutely agree guilty people should be punished. Unfortunately I also feel like innocent people shouldn't be punished. And I'm actually just as concerned about the latter as the former. Wouldn't it be nice if we could just point a Guilt-O-Meter at people and then we wouldn't have all this messy business with trials taking a long time? For now though I think I'll stick to supporting a criminal justice system involving courts, judges and juries.

[Hauldren Collider]

Jesus christ, how do you people live knowing that your boss could just fire you any time they felt the urge and for no actual reason? Is that not stressful as hell when you have rent/mortgages to pay?

I live pretty easily knowing that employers are a lot more eager to hire you if they know they won't be saddled with deadweight.

[MRT144]

Jesus christ, how do you people live knowing that your boss could just fire you any time they felt the urge and for no actual reason? Is that not stressful as hell when you have rent/mortgages to pay?

Self assurance that they'll land on their feet because they have a firm foundation of education, social connection, innate ability - it's confidence in being so good at what you do that it's THEIR loss if they fire you because they're irrational.

Part of why I went into the non profit sector - there's politics but its so low stakes and all about coddling ego.

[Hauldren Collider]

OK, people don't seem to understand my position.

1. I support at-will employment
2. I think an unfortunate consequence of at-will employment is unfair treatment of innocents accused of crimes. I don't think this is enough of a problem to justify changing employment rules, but it is worthy of consideration, and I might change my mind on this based on factual questions about how prevalent such a situation is.

EDIT: Being fired unfairly is also an unfortunate consequence of at will employment. However, companies have an incentive not to fire people unfairly. I don't think running businesses badly should be illegal. It would definitely be nice if all businesses are run well, but let's let the market decide what that means, not the government, right?