Pellerud confirms he'll be stepping down

[Vic]

^ speaks volumes to your character.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by AlanDouglas

Okay, let's say I had daughter in the military who had a history of publically insulting her commanding officer, going AWOL, and attempting repeated mutinies. Let's say she was relieved of command following the latest of these incidents and then launched a failed legal action to be reinstated. Now let's say she turns around a while later and applies for a position on the general staff, for which she has neither the experience nor the credentials.

Yeah. That's a tough call.

Can't imagine you having such an obstreporous daughter, but you know you don't apply for jobs in the military ..they choose you for advancement you go on the promotion list...and remember we dont shoot members of the military for being AWOL.. hell it takes 18 days to be declared AWOL.. as to muntiny ? When your person talking is the Sergant Major talking to the officer its not mutiny its relevant information a smart officer takes to heart...no RMC minted Captain or Majour discounts his or her Senior NCO.. its a carrier limiting move.

But i get your point you would be happy if we went back to the Press Gang and lash of nine tails to keep the navies in line.... fair enough it just does not happen to work in a modern world not in sport or life.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by AlanDouglas

Okay, let's say I had daughter in the military who had a history of publically insulting her commanding officer, going AWOL, and attempting repeated mutinies. Let's say she was relieved of command following the latest of these incidents and then launched a failed legal action to be reinstated. Now let's say she turns around a while later and applies for a position on the general staff, for which she has neither the experience nor the credentials.

Yeah. That's a tough call.

Yet your daughter would likely be drummed out of the military long before that.

[Richard]

^ Exactly, the perfect parallel. The player should have been ejected from the program long ago for cause as we say in the world of real work.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ Exactly, the perfect parallel. The player should have been ejected from the program long ago for cause as we say in the world of real work.

Once an employer makes a decision to dismiss a long serving employee Richard they have to go through a series of well defined steps ( yes defined by case law in the labour relations field ).

I would have loved to see such a suit for wrongfull dismissal in Hoopers case, she would have won quite handily Richard, if you doubt it go call a good labour relations lawyer and have chat.

Long standing employee.

Outstanding performances.

Team Leader, read quasi management into the description of team captain.

Signifcant Public profile over numerous years.

Yea, not a hard one to win in a real court with real judges looking at it from a labour relations viewpoint.

In fact it would make a great mock court case study for any Labour law professor in Canada.

Pretty sure the sport law guys have the case already in the study books, but seeing it as employer - employee status case sure does tip the scales in a different way.

Good insight Richard your getting better.

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ Exactly, the perfect parallel. The player should have been ejected from the program long ago for cause as we say in the world of real work.

Are you now admitting that your involvement in the case started long before August 2006.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ Exactly, the perfect parallel. The player should have been ejected from the program long ago for cause as we say in the world of real work.

Not really. You should be sober before you post.

[Richard]

"Once an employer makes a decision to dismiss a long serving employee Richard they have to go through a series of well defined steps ( yes defined by case law in the labour relations field )."

Not sure which province you're in but certainly in BC termination for cause is instant with no hoops to go through, no notice required and no severence. Employee's record means nothing. I know, I have used termination for cause as an employer more than once. Check your labour law.

[AlanDouglas]

Trillium,

My understanding is that wrongful dismissal common law only applies if there was no employment contract or if the contract did not properly cover the issue of termination and notice. I would be very surprised if the contracts used for carded athletes were not very clear on those points, otherwise this would be a huge Pandora's Box for any athlete who was ever cut from a program.

As for the Kerfoot funding, Charmaine signed a letter of agreement that outlined the steps she needed to take to be eligible for the funding, and what would happen if she didn't. She willfully reneged on the terms of that agreement.

And I believe that a person's length of service, etc, only comes into play in determining damages should they win their case. It is not relevant to deciding matters of contract law.

IANAL, but I really don't think this is as much a slam-dunk as you suggest.

[Vic]

Back to topic, someone told me they heard Pellerud saying he would be interested in taking a desk job for a while before coaching again. Is that widening his path for feelers as a result of no strong offers? Is that the more suitable place for him?

[Gordon]

quote:Originally posted by AlanDouglas

Trillium,

My understanding is that wrongful dismissal common law only applies if there was no employment contract or if the contract did not properly cover the issue of termination and notice. I would be very surprised if the contracts used for carded athletes were not very clear on those points, otherwise this would be a huge Pandora's Box for any athlete who was ever cut from a program.

I would think that you are completely correct about this.

[Gordon]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

"Once an employer makes a decision to dismiss a long serving employee Richard they have to go through a series of well defined steps ( yes defined by case law in the labour relations field )."

Not sure which province you're in but certainly in BC termination for cause is instant with no hoops to go through, no notice required and no severence. Employee's record means nothing. I know, I have used termination for cause as an employer more than once. Check your labour law.

Unless the "cause" was for an offence of a very serious nature you most certainly did go through a set of hoops and you did give a series of notices that performance had to improve. If you did not then consider yourself lucky not to have been sued for wrongful dismissal...even in BC.

[terpfan68]

So David Beckham could go to court if he is not picked for the English team? I thought coaches are allowed to pick their players and are fired or rehired based on their choices.

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by AlanDouglas

Trillium,

My understanding is that wrongful dismissal common law only applies if there was no employment contract or if the contract did not properly cover the issue of termination and notice. I would be very surprised if the contracts used for carded athletes were not very clear on those points, otherwise this would be a huge Pandora's Box for any athlete who was ever cut from a program.

As for the Kerfoot funding, Charmaine signed a letter of agreement that outlined the steps she needed to take to be eligible for the funding, and what would happen if she didn't. She willfully reneged on the terms of that agreement.

And I believe that a person's length of service, etc, only comes into play in determining damages should they win their case. It is not relevant to deciding matters of contract law.

IANAL, but I really don't think this is as much a slam-dunk as you suggest.

Although your answer was not addressed to me I would like to say that it is my understanding that the original of the alleged agreement was never produced at the arbitration. That it was poorly worded with poor English and that it was altered afterwards. In any event the funding to the players was reinstated after the arbitration. But Mr. Pellerud never called back any the players and said it was a "team" decision.

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by Vic

Back to topic, someone told me they heard Pellerud saying he would be interested in taking a desk job for a while before coaching again. Is that widening his path for feelers as a result of no strong offers? Is that the more suitable place for him?

Nothing like keeping it all in the family. I wonder what are his credentials for a desk job.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by AlanDouglas

Trillium,

My understanding is that wrongful dismissal common law only applies if there was no employment contract or if the contract did not properly cover the issue of termination and notice. I would be very surprised if the contracts used for carded athletes were not very clear on those points, otherwise this would be a huge Pandora's Box for any athlete who was ever cut from a program.

As for the Kerfoot funding, Charmaine signed a letter of agreement that outlined the steps she needed to take to be eligible for the funding, and what would happen if she didn't. She willfully reneged on the terms of that agreement.

And I believe that a person's length of service, etc, only comes into play in determining damages should they win their case. It is not relevant to deciding matters of contract law.

IANAL, but I really don't think this is as much a slam-dunk as you suggest.

Allan... Richard suggested that Hoopers dismissal should have happened long ago and alluded to how easy it was to fire for cause.. in a employer employee case, I simple pointed out i thought he was wrong in his assessment of the relevant labour law in Canada.

Now you have gone of and extrapolated my answer and statements as relating to the sport law case, as I thought was clear in my answer the two are not the same.

Often you and Richard love to mis-read posts and not stay on a clear logical line ..fair enough but each time you stray I will try to pull you back to reality......... now on with your show.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Nothing like keeping it all in the family. I wonder what are his credentials for a desk job.

Surely you mean he talked about a desk job in Norway ...?

Or maybe he wants to work at a desk in the CSA mmm Professional club liason, and have his office in Vancouver well his wife continues as Womens team admistrator ?

Can he even use a computer ?

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by terpfan68

So David Beckham could go to court if he is not picked for the English team? I thought coaches are allowed to pick their players and are fired or rehired based on their choices.

Of course a athlete can go to court to enforce selection if the reasons for non-selection are discriminatory there are hundreds of cases...happens in Canada every olympic cycle, coaches are often not simon pure as you seem to thing terp fan.. if a coach said..oh I wont pick Beckham for national service because he is now too old to be on the team ..... the coach in Canada would have comitted a actionable discrimination stating because of age he cant play ... i.e. his age disqualifys him.

Just because an athlete is one they dont lose protection given to all citizens.

[Massive Attack]

Why is this still being debated? Can we give all the crazies one thread where they can keep talking to eachother about the same crap over and over again? Does every thread in this forum have to be about the same bull****?

Hooper lost her cause when she pulled that bull**** in Newfoundland. Its too bad all her blind supporters don't hold her accountable at all for her own actions. I agree that Pellerud/CSA may have been wrong in the first place, but there is enough blame to go around to both sides.

As for the Whitecaps/residency conspiracies, give me a break. If Kerfoot/Whitecaps were looking at it as a pure business proposition they wouldn't even be involved in women's soccer at all.

[Trillium]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

"Once an employer makes a decision to dismiss a long serving employee Richard they have to go through a series of well defined steps ( yes defined by case law in the labour relations field )."

Not sure which province you're in but certainly in BC termination for cause is instant with no hoops to go through, no notice required and no severence. Employee's record means nothing. I know, I have used termination for cause as an employer more than once. Check your labour law.

An example of termination for cause and the payout to the dismissed employee...slam dunk indeed.

Monday, June 02, 2008

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently upheld an award of nearly $2.1 million to a former employee of Brewers Retail Inc., who was falsely accused of stealing $160 from the cash drawer.

In the summer of 1993, the Lundy’s Lane Store, in Niagara Falls, recorded ongoing shortages of cash and inventory. As a result, for a period of time, Brewers Retail had covert surveillance cameras installed in the store above the cash registers and the manager’s desk to monitor the conduct of employees. On two occasions, in November, 1993, the surveillance cameras revealed Douglas McNeil removing money from the till, at the store.

Brewers Retail Inc. subsequently turned over portions of the surveillance videotape to the police, who in turn charged McNeil with being part of a “fraudulent” scheme.

What Brewers Retail Inc. failed to provide to the police, however, were other segments of the video surveillance tape which demonstrated that McNeil had a perfectly legitimate explanation for removing money from the till. The police even asked the company, at one point, whether there was any exculpatory videotape, but it was not provided to them. As a result, McNeil was convicted of a criminal act and terminated disgracefully from Brewers Retail.

McNeil, a union employee, eventually sued Brewers Retail for malicious prosecution. The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the jury’s decision to award McNeil nearly $2.1 million in damages. The Court of Appeal commented in its decision,

By its verdict, it is apparent that the jury viewed BRI as a calculating and insensitive company that was prepared, for its own purposes, to see an innocent man convicted of a crime it knew he did not commit.

Shocked and devastated by his arrest, proclaimed publicly as a common thief, terminated from his employment, forced to go on unemployment insurance, forced to sell the family home and move to an apartment, forced to endure the anguish, stress and uncertainty of a 13-year ordeal – these are but some of the consequences McNeil was exposed to by reason of BRI’s callous and malicious conduct.

It would appear with the benefit of 13 years of hindsight, that Brewers Retail Inc. was so determined to solve the issue of the ongoing shortages of cash and inventory in its Niagara Falls store, that it purposely chose to rely upon those portions of the evidence which supported the conclusion they wished to reach, while blatantly ignoring those portions of the evidence which contradicted the desirable conclusion. This case represents yet another unfortunate example of an employer too anxious to leap to the conclusion that one of its employees was “dirty” and responsible for the pilfering of inventory and cash, rather than searching for the truth.

[Guest Ed]

quote:Originally posted by AlanDouglas

Trillium,

My understanding is that wrongful dismissal common law only applies if there was no employment contract or if the contract did not properly cover the issue of termination and notice. I would be very surprised if the contracts used for carded athletes were not very clear on those points, otherwise this would be a huge Pandora's Box for any athlete who was ever cut from a program.

As for the Kerfoot funding, Charmaine signed a letter of agreement that outlined the steps she needed to take to be eligible for the funding, and what would happen if she didn't. She willfully reneged on the terms of that agreement.

And I believe that a person's length of service, etc, only comes into play in determining damages should they win their case. It is not relevant to deciding matters of contract law.

IANAL, but I really don't think this is as much a slam-dunk as you suggest.

Care to expand on that? Where is Charmaine lying in this account of events? (see entry marked Oct 29, 2006):

http://www.charmainehooper.com/news-2006-q4.html

[Richard]

An entertaining if unfortunate story (Brewer's Retail) but what does it have to do with this discussion? It is surely self evident that if terminating for cause the employer better have cause, as defined in law, and get his/her facts straight.

I have unfortunately had reason to terminate several people for cause during my career and never once been challenged. All you have done is illustrate how an employer can get it wrong but none of this negates my original point about termination for cause being a valid severence with no liablity on the employer other than to get the facts right.

As for Charmaine Hooper, the consequences of signing an agreement (contract) and then not fulfilling obligations under that agreement must surely be obvious to anyone with two gray cells to rub together.

[Guest Ed]

Well, I don't know how many grey cells I have left, but it is painfully obvious to me that you made up your mind about that 'uppity xxxxx' a long time ago.

Posed Oct 2006 by Richard:

I have no wish to put down these three players' abilities on the field of play or their accumulated statistics but it seems to me this is all about money and not a result of any supposed loyalty to the national program. If it really was about the team the last thing they would have done was sue because of the inevitable impact it would have and has had on their team mates, the women's game in Canada and their own reputations. Hooper and the others are no doubt sore that through their own actions they have lost their CSA carding money (up to $1,500 per month) and the $20,000 a year from Kerfoot's fund, totalling a possible $38,000 per year.

Frankly it strikes me Charmaine Hooper has got just a little too big for her boots and she has dragged the other two down with her.

[terpfan68]

"Two big for her boots" does not translate as a racist comment.

[Guest Ed]

quote:Originally posted by terpfan68

"Two big for her boots" does not translate as a racist comment.

Never said it was. 'Uppity bitch' could be what I wrote.