NHLPA Files Grievance Over Termination of Richards Contract

[ouendan1]

It's an expected development. We will likely see some progress towards a resolution soon (I hope).

 

[PuckinUgly57]

Not surprised. Had they not, GMs would be using this maneuver to terminate contracts they deemed were bad.

So the legal process begins, first step will be independent arbitration (not Gary Bettman). Should be interesting to see how this all pans out.

 

[davnlaguna]

What are the possible outcomes?
Kings win Richards is screwed
Richards is brought back 100% and Kings can't buy him out until next year
Richards is bought out and Kings hit with buyout cap hit
They agree to something else and Richards gets paid something outside the cap and the Kings save cap space

Maybe there are more outcomes available

 

[smackdown380]

Not surprised. Had they not, GMs would be using this maneuver to terminate contracts they deemed were bad.

So the legal process begins, first step will be independent arbitration (not Gary Bettman). Should be interesting to see how this all pans out.

I can understand making sure others GMS don't use this but it sounded like this was more about Richards violation of a contract than hey we found a loophole. The contract was bad no doubt but it appears on the surface it was more of the Kings got lucky. I am not sure how other GMs could use this to rid themselves of a bad contract. This of course is all based on limited facts and thinking out loud.

 

[PuckinUgly57]

I can understand making sure others GMS don't use this but it sounded like this was more about Richards violation of a contract than hey we found a loophole. The contract was bad no doubt but it appears on the surface it was more of the Kings got lucky. I am not sure how other GMs could use this to rid themselves of a bad contract. This of course is all based on limited facts and thinking out loud.

Your last sentence is the key, we don't know all the facts. Based on what we do know, Richards was held and detained but not charged. OK, not a problem.

I also agree in the sense that the Kings got lucky - extremely lucky if this holds, Richards' dumbass timing is almost comical - and I also believe Richards committed a "material breach" by having this stuff on him and trying to take it across the border. The CBA and SPC both contain a code of conduct section, detailed on what is expected of a player for behavior that needs to be adhered to, and I'm pretty sure having illegal drugs and trying to take them across international borders isn't on the "yeah that's OK" list.

The Kings are going to cite this because of what I stated in the Stoll thread; it doesn't say you CAN'T do it, much like how GMs got around the cap by dishing out those front loaded/extra years tacked on contracts under the last CBA to lower the cap hit for a coveted player. Under any previous and current CBA, this incident is not covered in regards to having the option of terminating a contract. The Kings are well within their rights. Richards is also well within his rights to have the Union file a grievance for him.

Since this avenue has never been taken before by any NHL team, there is no prior event that sets a precedent, much like how case law does in the legal world.

This is going to look much like Arbitration, a he said/she said situation and bad blood going back and forth between the player and the team.

 

[CaptHowdy00]

The more I think about this the more I believe that the Kings will end up losing. Now knowing very little about what transpired at the border and even less about the law, I think that the PA will bring up both Voynov and Stoll.
They will ask why a guy who was arrested and is in jail is NOT in breach of his contract and why a guy who got arrested for drugs did not face the same situation. With Stoll the argument could be made that he was no longer under contract. But how do you get around the Voynov argument.
And as a side question, can the Kings do the same thing to Voynov? And if they in fact can, why haven't they?

 

[davnlaguna]

I think the Kings hands are tied with Voynov. The league imposed a penalty. The NHLPA would argue you can't punish someone twice for the same thing. The Kings could argue that the escalation of issues force their hand. We all know that the real reason is that Voynov has value and Richards doesn't.
I think this may get settled outside of the arbitration. Neither side wishes to lose and Mike doesn't want a record of this that could wind up in real court.

 

[smackdown380]

The more I think about this the more I believe that the Kings will end up losing. Now knowing very little about what transpired at the border and even less about the law, I think that the PA will bring up both Voynov and Stoll.
They will ask why a guy who was arrested and is in jail is NOT in breach of his contract and why a guy who got arrested for drugs did not face the same situation. With Stoll the argument could be made that he was no longer under contract. But how do you get around the Voynov argument.
And as a side question, can the Kings do the same thing to Voynov? And if they in fact can, why haven't they?

That is a good question and this site with John Hoven broke it down in a podcast. The podcast as a whole is about the loss of JW, Stoll and then Richards and Voynov. It's not long but if you want a summary here ya go:

He brought up a couple good points in regards to Richards such as (at the 7:00 minute mark)
1) The NHL approved the breach of contract excuse
2) The Kings with their legal team believe they have a case.

As for Voynov he made some points: (around the 9:20 mark where he begins discussing Voynov)
1) We don't know the full facts of Voynov
2) He paid his debt by being suspended for the year
3) He is serving time in jail
4) As puck says, we forgive and believe in 2nd chances as a society

Mayor’s Minutes on NHL Radio: Stoll to NYR, Richards Contract, Voynov Status

 

[CaptHowdy00]

I do believe in second chances. But what is a second chance based on? In the case of Richards it can be argued that his second chance came when he wasn't bought out under the exception 2 seasons ago. And that being arrested or what have you at the border is a third strike.
But I would argue that you have to look at the two situations separately. One has nothing to do with the other. The consequences of not producing on the ice should have been either being bought out or traded to a team that really has no future of being in the playoffs.
But being arrested, maybe for the first time ever, should get you a second chance saparate from the on ice performance. This is the fact that the PA will argue. That this action is simply an excuse for poor on ice performance and they will argue that one has nothing to do with the other. Now if the Kings can somehow link Richards' poor performance to drug use, then and only then would they have a leg to stand on.

 

[smackdown380]

Manitoba Royal Mounted Canadian Police have charged Richards with possession of a controlled substance. Even though the NHLPA filed a grievance it is looking like they don't have much if the RCMP are charging Richards with possession. I could be wrong though, the NHLPA may have case if Richards is not charged, Puck correct me if I am wrong.

BREAKING: Mike Richards charged with possession of controlled substance

 

[PuckinUgly57]

Anyone can be charged with anything, it's the conviction that matters (FYI - I knew he was going to be charged over the weekend. My Canadian buddy who has fed us information before it hit mainstream has connections to the RCMP and let me know but obviously I could not say anything).

The NHLPA followed standard protocol, they were going to file a grievance regardless because if they don't it sets a bad example for their members (players) and sets precedent that it's OK to terminate a player's contract if said player has no value to the team anymore. Unions are there to protect their members (in theory - don't even get me started on the LADWP or LA Teacher's unions), the NHLPA is no different.

The issue now becomes will he be convicted, in which case he most likely will not be able to enter the US because he violated his work Visa. That in itself is contractual breach, since Richards would not be able to fulfill his contractual duties to the Kings. If so, from a legal perspective the Kings are correct, it is a material breach and they will absorb the $1.32 million cap recapture and walk away from the rest.

If he is not convicted, the focal point will fall on whether the Kings followed protocol and put Richards in the 3 step Substance Abuse Program that is in the CBA. It is scaled with each step becoming more and more intensive and strict. We don't know if this was a "supplies, I do drugs!" type thing or if the Kings had prior knowledge of it and tried to get him the help he needed through the SAP.

If they did and he still got busted, it looks good for LA. If they did not, tough call that will be weighed out by an arbitrator but that brings it back to the work Visa issue. Dude can't play in the US, it's a contract violation (see Bob Probert from the 1980s - he wasn't allowed into Canada because of a Visa violation).

 

[davnlaguna]

I thought it would be more than minor possession. His Visa may stay intact, even with a guilty verdict. Depends on the substance and if it is his first time.

It looks to me that the Kings are going claim that hiding the fact he was busted harmed the team and that caused the material breach

 

[davnlaguna]

I thought it would be more than minor possession. His Visa may stay intact, even with a guilty verdict. Depends on the substance and if it is his first time.

It looks to me that the Kings are going claim that hiding the fact he was busted harmed the team and that caused the material breach

Rich seems to agree with me that the failing to notify is a large part of the Kings case
Kings Blog: Orange County Register:Former Kings center Richards faces controlled-substance charge

 

[PuckinUgly57]

Rich seems to agree with me that the failing to notify is a large part of the Kings case
Kings Blog: Orange County Register:Former Kings center Richards faces controlled-substance charge

Definitely a key point, considering they supposedly didn't know until 12 days later at the draft table with deals in the works.

That is an angle too, that because of said situation, they did not want to pass the buck onto someone else and were now stuck with Richards although they tried to do the right thing.

Precedent in their favor showing good will: the whole Ryan Smyth/Colin Fraser fiasco where Dumbo feels the Oilers tried to pawn off not one but two injured players in Brule and then Fraser. He made a public stink about it including looking into legal remedies at the time (2011) so that shows the Kings try to do things on the up and up. They eventually took Fraser and a 7th round pick.

The bottom line is LA wouldn't have taken this route if they didn't have a sufficient case and the legal team did its due diligence. They know way more about details than we do, I don't think it was just some minor possession. People pass across the border all the time with legitimate prescription pills and don't get stopped.

We don't have all the details but I'm sure they will come out. Tomorrow will be 60 days since Richards' was terminated, but with his initial court date set for Sept 10 this process will drag out longer.