Roger loses in court....again

[Harry Hooper]

Florio: Missouri Supreme Court invalidated the requirement of submitting all claims to arbitration resolved by the Commissioner.
 
 

First, the Court pointed out that Section 8.3 gives the Commissioner “full, complete, and final jurisdiction and authority to arbitrate . . . [a]ny dispute between any player, coach, and/or other employee of any member of the League and any member club or clubs.” Next, the Court pointed out that Section 8.1 requires the NFL to “select and employ a person of unquestioned integrity to serve as Commissioner of the League and shall determine the period and fix the compensation of his employment.” Then, the Court pointed out that Section 8.2 states that the “Commissioner shall have no financial interest, direct or indirect, in any professional sport.”
 
The provisions are clearly inconsistent; it’s impossible for the Commissioner to have “no financial interest” in “any professional sport” when he is paid by the league — and when the bulk of his compensation often comes from bonuses tied to the financial success of the league. More importantly, the Missouri Supreme Court concluded that the conflicting provisions and obvious bias of the Commissioner when “required to arbitrate claims against his employers” makes the requirement that employees submit claims to arbitration resolved by the Commissioner unenforceable.
 

 

[mauf]

With all appropriate caveats about doing legal analysis based on a PFT article, I suspect this case will only have relevance for off-field employees of the Rams and Chiefs. Federal courts are highly deferential to arbitration, and that's where any case involving player discipline, and most cases involving owner-league disputes, would be heard.

 

[soxfan121]

And really, only the Chiefs after this season. Because Los Angeles Rams.

 

[Otis Foster]

maufman is generally correct, but the opinion really focuses on the propriety of Carrot Top serving as arbitrator, not on the enforceabiity of the arbitration provision. It carefully distinguishes the two issues: The general enforceability of arbitration provisions and the process by which it, was negotiated; and the enforceability of specific provisions within the arbitration provision, e.g., designating Roger as arbitrator, when he clearly wasn't independent as required by the NFL Constitution.