Arland Bruce loses appeal in concussion lawsuit against CFL[url=http://3downnation.com/2017/05/12/arland-bruce-loses-appeal-concussion-lawsuit-cfl/]http://3downnation.com/2017/05/12/arlan ... wsuit-cfl/[/url]
Not sure how to feel about this.
Well, the CFL gets to continue to exist, so there's that.
Here is a story with more depth, some complicated lawyer talk, perhaps somebody with some legal background can explain the process. :?[url=http://ottawacitizen.com/sports/football/cfl/cfl-wins-again-against-concussion-lawsuit-filed-by-former-player-arland-bruce]http://ottawacitizen.com/sports/footbal ... land-bruce[/url]
Agree, if he wins this case it would leave the CFL open to paying out millions which would probably bankrupt the league.
contact sports have implications. who knew? concussions are bad. really?
I get that he is saying that people within the league downplayed the consequences of concussions...but this to me seems frivolous. Most people when they attempt to sue for something like this are doing it to draw attention to a situation that needs attention and create an atmosphere that fosters evolution around it to improve the situation....but in this situation that is clearly already there now and sports leagues are continually trying to improve on the issue now that the long term effects of concussions are out there and better understood. Was that there his entire career? Nope. But was the true understanding of just how bad the consequences of concussions? Not really.
AB3 signs a new contract in 2013 with MTL, plays all 18 games, had a decent season with over 850yrds REC and returning punts and kickoffs and now is naming MTL in his lawsuit for not recognizing his concussion from playing on the Lions in 2012.
Here he is signing his new contract with MTL in 2013
#CFL: Arland Bruce signs his #Alouettes contract at the Sheraton in downtown Montreal.
Arland went about this all wrong...
Working "high steel" construction is dangerous, everyone knows it ...... but that doesn't mean that the construction company is devoid of responsibility for taking all reasonable steps to ensure it is done as safely as possible ...... or does it?
Writ large, pro sports does little to discourage voluntary behaviour by players that may not have an intent to injure (ever so difficult to assess) but that clearly shows no regard for the higher potential/probability for serious injury
And everyone has known iron work is dangerous since the first steel structure went up. Safety was a complete joke, but has evolved....kinda the same thing as concussions.
Personally disagree with the second part. We have seen the penalties for these types of actions grow more and more every year. The biggest hurdle the CFL in sending a real message through discipline is the CFLPA. The CFLPA needs to realize that their goal is not to 'battle the man' but to look out for the greater good of their constituency. In other words they need to step up and say 'that was a dangerous action' and look out for the protection of the group as a whole instead of an individual. Obviously not always...but it needs to happen. It is the downside of unions.
True, but that evolution was the result of legal action of one or several kinds, including civil suits, regulatory or legislative action; the changes didn't evolve without pressure.
There are a few key points in this case:
- AB3 did not lose on the merits he lost on procedural grounds (that this needed to be pursued through the claims and arbitration provisions of the collective agreement between the CFL/CFLPA);
- The issue is not that pro-football is dangerous but in who has the best knowledge and responsibility at what point in time to assess injuries and medical readiness to return to play as a result of those dangers (or alternatively who is being pressured to conceal or ignore knowledge that should be applied to a particular situation);
- The judge recognized that the avenues for redress are restrictive and unusual when comparing pro-athletes vs other workers.
We shall see if another appeal will go ahead to the Supreme Court of Canada or whether AB3 will re-start the process with the CFL/CFLPA (that could easily end up in court again).
You can't relate pro-sports to industry.
Can you imagine a player going to a tribunal for unfair dismissal? in sports if you don't perform you are gone, if you put weight on or slow down you are gone, there is always someone faster and better to take your spot.
Pro sports is a whole different world and that's why AB3's lawsuit was dismissed it can't be related to private industry or business.
I think the whole point of the two jurisdiction rulings in the league's favour is that disputes have to be settled through processes agreed to by collective agreement, which presumably means a grievance can be filed and (if not settled between the parties) heard by an arbitrator -- not through the courts.
We are not talking dismissals here, we are talking injury. Not the same thing at all.
/Nod. Absolutely agree. It's only been the last decade or so that the true and awful ramifications of repeated concussions have been verified. Nobody intentionally ignored it once it became it became clear that permanent brain damage is fact, and leagues have responded, perhaps too slowly and cautiously, with rule changes and training techniques. Can more be done? Probably, but the point is that an effort is being made to make the game safer.
Was he not suing the league and at the same time was trying to get on a team?
Didn’t wasnt to start a new thread but Marc Glaude’s retirement was apparently a decision he made after gaining a concussion in camp.
Working “high steel” construction is dangerous, everyone knows it … but that doesn’t mean that the construction company is devoid of responsibility for taking all reasonable steps to ensure it is done as safely as possible … or does it?
BS you don’t know that. CFL has made great safety rules/commitments/medical aid on field for all players as there union demands. You can get hurt playing regardless. And High steel work is not dangerous.
If you follow safety rules laid out all should be good on any job.
My perspective was in terms of the CFL/NHL/NFL really doing little to realistically/effectively discourage reckless and dangerous hits. They may take good care of them once injured, but IMO prevention is more important.
And my "high steel" example was in the context that safety regulations exist to reduce the likelihood of injury in that industry ... prevention means there is not an injury to treat.
Makes we wonder how sports like boxing and MMA will eventually evolve with this even though it is essentially mutually consensual assault?