rhymes with orange

The timeline in this situatation was this. The Bombers played in BC on Friday, October 14, 2016. The Bombers had a bye week but Cummings stayed in town, with the alleged criminal offense occuring in the early morning hours of Sunday, October 16, so it is quite possible that teammates and front office staff would have be completely unaware (unless Cummings was with a teammate or two - doubtful).

However, the Bombers came back here for the Western Semi-Final on Sunday, November 13. A month later. It is hard for me to believe that the Vancouver Police Department did not reach out to Mr. Cummings or the Bombers to investigate the alleged crime either in the intervening month, or more likely, when the Bombers came back here.

Paolo X


Contracts ought to be suspended, not voided, until due process runs its course for players being charged with certain felonies....
I agree!

Question: if the charges prove baseless should the player be financially compensated?
Yes though according to a formula agreed in the contract with the CFL players union such that the player who was wrongly charged would receive a majority of his pay.

The amount could, and in my opinion should, be more than what would be received via Workers Compensation laws. I am not sure how those laws work in Canada by province exactly, but in much of the US the amount for Workers Compensation is 2/3 of lost pay so in this situation I would say said player should receive no less than
80% of lost base pay
PLUS of the amount of any associated fine by the league or other levy refunded during the suspension if paid already by said player
PLUS simple interest at 10% since the date of suspension by the CFL on all fines, levies, league expenses, et cetera (not on lost base salary).
Or, how's about employers stop assigning a guilty verdict before the justice system does....and if they do choose to take the safe route and achieve separation, then pay the given employee's salary while the contract is still valid and the given matter is unresolved, unless of course there is indisputable evidence, as in the Ray Rice situation, or they admit guilt.

I am all for people guilty of these things paying for it dearly, and I even believe that the vast majority of the allegations in these situations are true...but we all know a person or know of a person either through friends or the news that it was not true.  While the justice system is far from perfect, it is what we have and one of the better systems in the world...and I for one do not believe that social opinion should trump that system before it has a chance to act....social opinion is important and should still be there, but it should not strip someone of employment, or at least their pay...because I do believe an employer has the right to safeguard itself from public opinion...but that should not mean that they get to rip up employment agreements.
Yes. I covered some of the conditions I would propose for any such suspensions by the CFL, which would reduce greatly the number of suspensions of the not guilty in the end, as noted a few posts below on 15 March. 

One of the three proposed conditions includes the requirement for video evidence of the actual illegal physical contact associated with certain violent felonies by a player, such as was the case for the situation with domestic violence by Ray Rice in the US, even before due process of the law runs its course. 

My comments above apply only to such situations as noted in my associated post below.
Best Regards, Paolo

HfxTC

The timeline in this situatation was this. The Bombers played in BC on Friday, October 14, 2016. The Bombers had a bye week but Cummings stayed in town, with the alleged criminal offense occuring in the early morning hours of Sunday, October 16, so it is quite possible that teammates and front office staff would have be completely unaware (unless Cummings was with a teammate or two - doubtful).

However, the Bombers came back here for the Western Semi-Final on Sunday, November 13. A month later. It is hard for me to believe that the Vancouver Police Department did not reach out to Mr. Cummings or the Bombers to investigate the alleged crime either in the intervening month, or more likely, when the Bombers came back here.
Why would they reach out to his employer?
Everything I write is just an opinion formed from various sources. Some more reliable than others, it is expressed as a composite of facts, innuendos, emotions, personal experiences and complete fabulation into a gumbo for entertainment purposes alone.

depopulationINC

The timeline in this situatation was this. The Bombers played in BC on Friday, October 14, 2016. The Bombers had a bye week but Cummings stayed in town, with the alleged criminal offense occuring in the early morning hours of Sunday, October 16, so it is quite possible that teammates and front office staff would have be completely unaware (unless Cummings was with a teammate or two - doubtful).

However, the Bombers came back here for the Western Semi-Final on Sunday, November 13. A month later. It is hard for me to believe that the Vancouver Police Department did not reach out to Mr. Cummings or the Bombers to investigate the alleged crime either in the intervening month, or more likely, when the Bombers came back here.
Why would they reach out to his employer?
Agreed.  That would seem way over stepping boundaries.  How would someone feel if a previous employer contacted their prospective employer about something...and no, it really doesn't matter what the matter was.  without a charge/conviction that action could actually land someone in legal trouble.

Paolo X

The timeline in this situatation was this. The Bombers played in BC on Friday, October 14, 2016. The Bombers had a bye week but Cummings stayed in town, with the alleged criminal offense occuring in the early morning hours of Sunday, October 16, so it is quite possible that teammates and front office staff would have be completely unaware (unless Cummings was with a teammate or two - doubtful).

However, the Bombers came back here for the Western Semi-Final on Sunday, November 13. A month later. It is hard for me to believe that the Vancouver Police Department did not reach out to Mr. Cummings or the Bombers to investigate the alleged crime either in the intervening month, or more likely, when the Bombers came back here.
Why would they reach out to his employer?
Agreed.  That would seem way over stepping boundaries.  How would someone feel if a previous employer contacted their prospective employer about something...and no, it really doesn't matter what the matter was.  without a charge/conviction that action could actually land someone in legal trouble.
Right on they would be stepping way over boundaries

As you are if I recall correctly at attorney I would defer to you for how it would handled in Canada if a private employer "snitched" to another private employer in such a situation, 
but in the US typically employers avoid negative commentary on such situations for former employees, even when there are criminal charges of public record, for two reasons:
 
1) landing themselves in a lawsuit for defamation including slander, and even if in the right if you are sued with some shred of merit to go to trial (or settle the case before), you will not be recovering your legal fees as a business and 
2) if this defamation were done on a regular basis with former employees, in certain industries the door could open up for various labour and anti-trust actions in federal court; right or wrong, a business then would be with heavy legal expenses and in very hot water to deal with not just the complainants but with the federal government.

Overwhelmingly most private employers, including even some of the worst ones, know well better at least on this issue in the US after letting employees go for any reason.

joe

Legal end of things aside.

Bombers didn't need to say anything to anybody but they needed to reinforce the concept of acceptable behaviour.

They could have quietly paid monies owed and released him or fed a story about an injury or whatever but they should not have allowed him to continue as a member of the organization and played him in the playoff game.The message sent to the rest of the team is to not get caught. By their silence they condone the action. 

If the counter is that the Bombers did not know so be it and let the investigation run it's course. Won't be long before the Cummings name is forgotten and the Bomber name remembered.

Bad publicity for the CFL as well.

depopulationINC

Legal end of things aside.

Bombers didn't need to say anything to anybody but they needed to reinforce the concept of acceptable behaviour.

They could have quietly paid monies owed and released him or fed a story about an injury or whatever but they should not have allowed him to continue as a member of the organization and played him in the playoff game.The message sent to the rest of the team is to not get caught. By their silence they condone the action.

If the counter is that the Bombers did not know so be it and let the investigation run it's course. Won't be long before the Cummings name is forgotten and the Bomber name remembered.

Bad publicity for the CFL as well.
So you feel they should have found him guilty before charges were even pressed?  Sorry, but I entirely disagree.

rhymes with orange

The timeline in this situatation was this. The Bombers played in BC on Friday, October 14, 2016. The Bombers had a bye week but Cummings stayed in town, with the alleged criminal offense occuring in the early morning hours of Sunday, October 16, so it is quite possible that teammates and front office staff would have be completely unaware (unless Cummings was with a teammate or two - doubtful).

However, the Bombers came back here for the Western Semi-Final on Sunday, November 13. A month later. It is hard for me to believe that the Vancouver Police Department did not reach out to Mr. Cummings or the Bombers to investigate the alleged crime either in the intervening month, or more likely, when the Bombers came back here.
Why would they reach out to his employer?
What I meant was for VPD to show up at walkthrough, where they know he's going to be ("we need to talk to Mr. Cummings"). They're not going to question him for a criminal investigation at a time that's convenient to him/Bombers.

In the CFL documentary series "CFL Traditions," Bill Baker talked about this when he played for them in the 70s and there were some notorious characters on the Lions. The police would often show up at practice to question guys. Is that informing the club of the crime? Not directly. But they're going to know something's up. 

depopulationINC

The timeline in this situatation was this. The Bombers played in BC on Friday, October 14, 2016. The Bombers had a bye week but Cummings stayed in town, with the alleged criminal offense occuring in the early morning hours of Sunday, October 16, so it is quite possible that teammates and front office staff would have be completely unaware (unless Cummings was with a teammate or two - doubtful).

However, the Bombers came back here for the Western Semi-Final on Sunday, November 13. A month later. It is hard for me to believe that the Vancouver Police Department did not reach out to Mr. Cummings or the Bombers to investigate the alleged crime either in the intervening month, or more likely, when the Bombers came back here.
Why would they reach out to his employer?
What I meant was for VPD to show up at walkthrough, where they know he's going to be ("we need to talk to Mr. Cummings"). They're not going to question him for a criminal investigation at a time that's convenient to him/Bombers.

In the CFL documentary series "CFL Traditions," Bill Baker talked about this when he played for them in the 70s and there were some notorious characters on the Lions. The police would often show up at practice to question guys. Is that informing the club of the crime? Not directly. But they're going to know something's up.
There is a big difference between the police informing an employer of potential legal actions and a previous employer telling a new/prospective employer

CFL Pete

In the fishbowl of celebrity, you have to keep your nose clean.  The public scrutiny requires an exceptional level of accountability.  If you make the team look bad, that hurts.  Perception is reality.  Kyries Hebert was charged down south a while back.  Eric Tillman was charged but exonerated.  But the mere suggestion of impropriety is enough to tarnish a player's reputation. 

joe




I am confused. Bombers do everything right on their end. 

18 months later when the news comes out the CFL immediately suspends the contract and player.

Do not believe a trial has taken place as yet. 

Sounds like you and your lawyer have a bunch of work to set this straight and allow the man to earn a living.

Just saying.

depopulationINC

In the fishbowl of celebrity, you have to keep your nose clean.  The public scrutiny requires an exceptional level of accountability.  If you make the team look bad, that hurts.  Perception is reality.  Kyries Hebert was charged down south a while back.  Eric Tillman was charged but exonerated.  But the mere suggestion of impropriety is enough to tarnish a player's reputation.
no he wasn't.  He pleaded guilty.  He received an absolute discharge, which simply meant that they found it an isolated incident fueled by his altered state from meds and that he was truly regretful, thus still guilty but no criminal charge/sentence.  IMO, from what was put out there surrounding all of it...it was the right action by the judge.
 


Users Online

53 Guests, 0 Users (4 Spiders)

Users active in past 15 minutes:
Google (4)

Most Online Today: 105. Most Online Ever: 489 (Nov 26 2017, 08:38 PM)