NHLPA files grievance on behalf of Mike Richards

[Kin]

Just like you can bet yours that the Kings lawyers and the arbitrator will be pretty focused on the language of the CBA that governs said contract. That contract has no validity without the CBA, making the CBA the more important document.

And, again, remember this is regarding your claim that both parties could be credibly said to have drawn up the contract. That's just not true. It's a contract between Richards and the Kings, not the Kings and the NHLPA. That collective bargaining dictates what the Kings are or aren't allowed to offer Richards doesn't change that fact. Richards didn't write the contract, therefore ambiguous language in it isn't going to be held against him.

 

[Tigger]

How can they have met their requirements? The issue hasn't been resolved yet.

Because, their only requirement in this case (at this point, at least) is to evaluate Richards' need for further treatment.

I don't know if he's been placed in the program but it's a fairly easy argument that should he 'graduate' to stage 2 from a conviction that the team has a responsibility to see that through, and, considering his pay would be suspended at that point, it's highly doubtful an arbitrator would side with the team's decision to punish him further.

 

[Kin]

In fact I think that probably the best example of what I'm talking about can be found in the decision that granted MLB players free agency. Baseball's Reserve Clause said that at the expiration of a player's contract, a team could extend their rights to him for a year. When this got challenged by the PA, MLB argued that because a player signed a new contract every year, they could extend their rights by that extra year in perpetuity. Despite there being no contract language that allowed for that, MLB's argument was, essentially, that it had always been interpreted as such and as a result the ambiguity of the language was secondary to it's traditional interpretation and that they had powers outside the scope of the specific language of the contract.

This was in league with a CBA too. That argument did not go well for them.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Perhaps this has been brought up and explained. The issue I see here is that if they terminate Richards' are they not obligated to terminate Voynov's? Or do they just have to terminate the one's that happen to be an albatross. If that's the case, we should put some weed in Dion's suitcase.

 

[bustaheims]

I don't know if he's been placed in the program but it's a fairly easy argument that should he 'graduate' to stage 2 from a conviction that the team has a responsibility to see that through, and, considering his pay would be suspended at that point, it's highly doubtful an arbitrator would side with the team's decision to punish him further.

Stage 2 is less about the team and more about the player and the league. The league enforces the suspension, and the player has to voluntarily agree to enter a drug treatment program, as neither the league nor the team have the authority to forcibly commit a player into a rehab program. The team may be required to cover the expenses associated with it, and should that happen, even with the contract terminated, the Kings would be responsible, but, again, that doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility of contract termination.

 

[bustaheims]

Perhaps this has been brought up and explained. The issue I see here is that if they terminate Richards' are they not obligated to terminate Voynov's? Or do they just have to terminate the one's that happen to be an albatross. If that's the case, we should put some weed in Dion's suitcase.

No. They have no obligation to treat both cases equally - at least, not a contractual/enforceable one. A moral obligation, maybe, but that's really it.

 

[bustaheims]

Well, it really depends on how much power an independent arbitrator will have. That one Forbes article I posted brought up a couple of similar instances with the MLB about 10 years ago. In both cases a contract was terminated, the PA grieved, and the two sides settled with a sizeable payout of the players contract. I don't know how that ended up working cap-wise though.

No matter what, the arbitrator has to work within the confines of the CBA. The MLB CBA allowed for contracts to be reworked/renegotiated. The NHL CBA does not, and has very specific language about how contracts can be bought out.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Perhaps this has been brought up and explained. The issue I see here is that if they terminate Richards' are they not obligated to terminate Voynov's? Or do they just have to terminate the one's that happen to be an albatross. If that's the case, we should put some weed in Dion's suitcase.

No. They have no obligation to treat both cases equally - at least, not a contractual/enforceable one. A moral obligation, maybe, but that's really it.

I know there's no real obligation but it's a sad state when a guy bringing some drugs across the border is treated like an outcast and the idiot charged with a felony domestic assault and facing 9 years in prison if convicted is welcomed back because his contract and skills are more welcome in the dressing room.

 

[bustaheims]

I know there's no real obligation but it's a sad state when a guy bringing some drugs across the border is treated like an outcast and the idiot charged with a felony domestic assault and facing 9 years in prison if convicted is welcomed back because his contract and skills are more welcome in the dressing room.

Well, as things stand, Voynov is suspended without pay, and, should he end up in prison, his contract will expire without him seeing another penny of it. So, outside him still having a contract, he's basically in the same boat right now.

 

[Bates]

Voynov has been sentences and already served jail time.  They are trying to deport him now.

I know there's no real obligation but it's a sad state when a guy bringing some drugs across the border is treated like an outcast and the idiot charged with a felony domestic assault and facing 9 years in prison if convicted is welcomed back because his contract and skills are more welcome in the dressing room.

Well, as things stand, Voynov is suspended without pay, and, should he end up in prison, his contract will expire without him seeing another penny of it. So, outside him still having a contract, he's basically in the same boat right now.

 

[bustaheims]

Voynov has been sentences and already served jail time.  They are trying to deport him now.

I'm not sure about the deportation thing - I think that's mostly internet chatter/rumour - but the league is apparently still conducting their own investigation (whatever that means), and are considering all possible options, including terminating his contract. Nevertheless, he's still suspended indefinitely, and there's a very real chance he'll never dress in the NHL again. The Kings have really just deferred to the league on this one.

 

[Tigger]

I don't know if he's been placed in the program but it's a fairly easy argument that should he 'graduate' to stage 2 from a conviction that the team has a responsibility to see that through, and, considering his pay would be suspended at that point, it's highly doubtful an arbitrator would side with the team's decision to punish him further.

Stage 2 is less about the team and more about the player and the league. The league enforces the suspension, and the player has to voluntarily agree to enter a drug treatment program, as neither the league nor the team have the authority to forcibly commit a player into a rehab program. The team may be required to cover the expenses associated with it, and should that happen, even with the contract terminated, the Kings would be responsible, but, again, that doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility of contract termination.

The stages are connected and the entire league, hence the team, abides by it. Are you suggesting an arbitrator will say yeah, sure you can suspend him and terminate him at the same time? The specific language there does not include termination.

An arbitrator is going to hear that a couple days before the termination Dean Lombardi publicly admitted he felt betrayed by Mike after a heart to heart meeting from the previous year went terribly wrong, before finding out about this issue, and that his contract was an albatross LA was looking to remove from their neck. Fehr isn't going to let that slip by while providing ample evidence that these are not extraordinary circumstances or a substantial material breach.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I'm not sure about the deportation thing - I think that's mostly internet chatter/rumour - but the league is apparently still conducting their own investigation (whatever that means), and are considering all possible options, including terminating his contract. Nevertheless, he's still suspended indefinitely, and there's a very real chance he'll never dress in the NHL again. The Kings have really just deferred to the league on this one.

Obviously we're just in wait and see mode on this one, but I'd be pretty shocked to see him miss this entire season. I don't even think that the NHL will add much, if anything to his suspension. He's already technically been suspended for 76 games, that's like time-served. Not saying it's right or anything like that though. Even if his contract gets terminated for some reason, he's still a very good defenceman. Some team will pick him up.

 

[Frank E]

Again, I'm not going to put a ton of stock into "Hey, you never know what might be true" when a simple press release referring to specific language within the CBA would effectively end discussion on the matte.r

Since they're likely expecting a protracted battle over this, why would the Kings show their cards? 

 

[bustaheims]

Obviously we're just in wait and see mode on this one, but I'd be pretty shocked to see him miss this entire season. I don't even think that the NHL will add much, if anything to his suspension. He's already technically been suspended for 76 games, that's like time-served. Not saying it's right or anything like that though. Even if his contract gets terminated for some reason, he's still a very good defenceman. Some team will pick him up.

The league doesn't seem to be in any hurry to reinstate him. There's an issue with his immigration status - which is where the deportation rumours are coming from - and the league is basically waiting until after that's settled to really dive into things from their end, so he could end up missing a long time. And, if the immigration thing doesn't go his way - and, with having been convicted of a criminal offence and all, there's a good chance it won't - it may be taken out of the league's hands. And, even if it does, that could be a long, protracted process, and then you still have whatever the league feels they need to do to come afterwards. On top of that, there's also been a change in the way sports leagues are starting to handle this kind of stuff after the way the NFL got raked over the coals with their handling of the Ray Rice situation. MLB has recently introduced extremely harsh punishments for abuse stuff - there's now no limit on how long they can suspend players. It wouldn't surprise me if the league looked at this as an opportunity to send a strong message and set the precedent for the future. As good as a defenceman as he is, he now comes with a lot of baggage and bad press. It really wouldn't shock me if he doesn't play in the NHL again. I think he's likely KHL bound in the near future.

 

[Kin]

Since they're likely expecting a protracted battle over this, why would the Kings show their cards?

Because if it were as simple as "There's specific language in the CBA that lets them do this" there wouldn't be a protracted battle.

 

[Kin]

Perhaps this has been brought up and explained. The issue I see here is that if they terminate Richards' are they not obligated to terminate Voynov's? Or do they just have to terminate the one's that happen to be an albatross. If that's the case, we should put some weed in Dion's suitcase.

There isn't an obligation because they almost certainly don't have the option of terminating either contract. An arbitrator will absolutely ask the Kings to explain their differing approaches though to the two players and, once the obvious is revealed, it'll probably be another nail in the coffin of their case.

 

[Frank E]

Since they're likely expecting a protracted battle over this, why would the Kings show their cards?

Because if it were as simple as "There's specific language in the CBA that lets them do this" there wouldn't be a protracted battle.

Aren't there court battles all over the land disputing interpretations of language in contracts?

 

[Kin]

Because if it were as simple as "There's specific language in the CBA that lets them do this" there wouldn't be a protracted battle.

Aren't there court battles all over the land disputing interpretations of language in contracts?

Sure, you're allowed to sue for whatever reason you want. It doesn't automatically ascribe merit to your position.

But, again, if there were specificity about this, if part of the CBA said "A team can, at it's discretion, terminate a contract after a player has been arrested for any reason" then there wouldn't be a debate. Then rather than Forbes writing articles saying the NHL's position is a long shot, there'd be a tweet saying "Yeah, tough luck for Mike Richards but the CBA lets them do this".

Remember, this isn't the NFL. The NHL has independent and binding arbitration on these disputes. This "protracted battle" will be limited to an arbitration hearing.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

The league doesn't seem to be in any hurry to reinstate him. There's an issue with his immigration status - which is where the deportation rumours are coming from - and the league is basically waiting until after that's settled to really dive into things from their end, so he could end up missing a long time.

Well they're not in a hurry sure but that's only because he's still in jail and because his immigration issues haven't been sorted out. I read a little about his potential deportation, it doesn't sound like that generally happens in domestic dispute cases.

It wouldn't surprise me if the league looked at this as an opportunity to send a strong message and set the precedent for the future.

I think that the NHL is terrified right now about setting a precedent considering what's going on with Patrick Kane right now.