[ad_1]
Getty Images
But for the investigation into the chronic atmosphere of workplace misconduct by the Washington football team, the NFL would not be investigating Raiders coach Jon Gruden for an email sent to the former executive of Washington Bruce Allen. Yet now that the NFL has described the content of the email as “disparaging, appalling, obnoxious and contrary to our values of respect and inclusiveness,” the NFL must decide what to do about it.
Personal conduct policy becomes the first place to look for potential reasons for discipline. Nothing in the current policy directly addresses the use of racist language in communication with a third party, even though a violation of 10 years ago would be subject to disciplinary action.
That said, the policy has a broad catch-all, prohibiting “conduct that undermines or endangers the integrity of the NFL, NFL clubs or NFL personnel.” It would be easy for the league to claim that Gruden’s comments meet that standard.
Gruden would likely claim, if disciplined under that standard, that this was a private comment, not a public statement. The league probably wouldn’t care.
The strongest argument against any kind of discipline under the Personal Conduct Policy comes from the fact that Gruden made this comment when he was not employed by any NFL team. The league could then try to claim that Gruden said what he said while working for an NFL broadcast partner, and that the definition of “workplace” in the policy makes those remarks fall within the purview of its competence.
“Workplace means any place or means of transportation used in connection with NFL activities, including club facilities, training camp, stadium, locker rooms, the location of a sponsored event.” by the club and while traveling as a team or on NFL-related business, ”the policy explains. While this is a bit of a stretch, Gruden emailing in his role as a high-level employee from an NFL broadcast partner to a high-level executive with an NFL team could be seen as behavior. occurring in a “workplace”.
In the end, Gruden’s arguments and defenses may not matter. Just ask Saints coach Sean Payton about it; it was suspended for the whole of 2012 on the basis of fragile evidence and without any valid basis to combat it. Coaches do not have a union and their rights, if any, go through the league. Basically, if the league decides to take action against a coach, they will – and the coach won’t have many viable options in response. Unless Gruden wants to take a page from former Raiders owner Al Davis and sue the league, Gruden might find it difficult to defeat any discipline the league may choose to impose, even if the policy of personal conduct doesn’t. not justify.
The Raiders would find it difficult to take any significant action against Gruden, which could go as far as firing him for cause and denying him any rights to any remaining guaranteed wages. Unless he signed papers when he was hired in 2018 promising that he has not committed any past bad behavior that the team is not aware of and if the papers also reserve the right to dismiss for cause if such behavior later turns out, the Raiders will be stuck.
Again, any discipline imposed by the team would undoubtedly be subject to dispute resolution procedures in almost any coaching contract. This term requires the coach to assert his rights or remedies through a grievance process which will be resolved by the commissioner.
This, although on the surface it appears that the options for the league and the team are limited, the absence of a union for coaches and the presence of contracts and policies which put the package in favor of the league and team will make it difficult for Gruden. to defeat any penalties the NFL or the Raiders may choose to impose.
[ad_2]
Source link