NFLPA tells agents to reject “inappropriate” language in Rams contracts

[RamBill]

NFLPA tells agents to reject “inappropriate” language in Rams contracts

Posted by Mike Florio

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ect-inappropriate-language-in-rams-contracts/

The Rams apparently are staying in St. Louis. In one very specific, self-serving way.

Per a league source, contracts being offered to new players state that the laws of Missouri, not California, control the relationship. The NFL Players Association has in turn instructed all certified contract agents to reject that term as “inappropriate.”

Other language in the contract makes the purpose of this strategy clear. The Rams hope to nudge any workers’ compensation claims away from California and into Missouri.

From the contract: “The parties hereto acknowledge that this Player Contract has been negotiated and executed in Missouri; that should any dispute, claim or cause of action (collectively ‘dispute’) arise concerning rights or liabilities arising from the relationship between the Player and the Club, the parties hereto agree that the law governing such dispute shall be the law of the State of Missouri. Furthermore, the exclusive jurisdiction for resolving Workers’ Compensation related claims shall be the Division of Workers’ Compensation of Missouri, and the Missouri Workers’ Compensation Act shall govern.”

The NFLPA strongly disagrees. “We believe that any reference to the state of Missouri is inappropriate since the Rams have relocated to California as evidenced by the fact that they have changed their name on their website to the Los Angeles Rams, are prepared to hold off-season workouts and training camp in California, and will practice and play their home games in California in 2016,” the union says in the memo to all agents.

It’s a gutsy move by the Rams, for a variety of reasons. Apart from trying to keep workers’ compensation claims out of a forum that universally is regarded as grossly pro-employee, the Rams hope to impose burdens on the administrative mechanisms of the state they have now abandoned.

Here’s the bottom line. If you move to California, you accept everything that goes along with it. And if there’s something about it you don’t like, don’t move there.

 

[fearsomefour]

This arrogant sort of "smartest guys in the room" vide I get from Snisher really needs to stop. It killed the team with the horrific Foles signing and continues here.
So, can a guy who has signed go back on the market now?
Idiots.

 

[Ram65]

From the contract: “The parties hereto acknowledge that this Player Contract has been negotiated and executed in Missouri; that should any dispute, claim or cause of action (collectively ‘dispute’) arise concerning rights or liabilities arising from the relationship between the Player and the Club, the parties hereto agree that the law governing such dispute shall be the law of the State of Missouri. Furthermore, the exclusive jurisdiction for resolving Workers’ Compensation related claims shall be the Division of Workers’ Compensation of Missouri, and the Missouri Workers’ Compensation Act shall govern.”

The NFLPA strongly disagrees. “We believe that any reference to the state of Missouri is inappropriate since the Rams have relocated to California as evidenced by the fact that they have changed their name on their website to the Los Angeles Rams, are prepared to hold off-season workouts and training camp in California, and will practice and play their home games in California in 2016,” the union says in the memo to all agents.

I don't think it's a big deal. Could have just been overlooked with the new contracts. Could have been done on purpose because it's better for the Rams. Either way it should not change much.

 

[bubbaramfan]

If the state of Missouri deducted from their checks workmens comp, then they should be the ones to pay. Going forward, California will be deducting workmans comp and they will be on the hook for unemployment.

 

[12intheBox]

I don't think it's a big deal. Could have just been overlooked with the new contracts. Could have been done on purpose because it's better for the Rams. Either way it should not change much.

Yeah - I'll bet an army of the best lawyers this planet has ever known just overlooked it.

And no - it's not a big deal because the NFLPA caught it - but it isn't a good look for the Rams. These are employment contracts - and the reputation of your employer matters.

 

[Roman Snow]

Sounds like the Rams are residing in the state of confusion.

 

[fearsomefour]

Yeah sloppy or scummy

 

[wmc540]

In terms of contract law this isn't really that rare of an occurrence.

 

[-X-]

Non-issue. An [existing] contract executed in Missouri is bound by Missouri law. If it happens to benefit the Rams, then so what. That's just how it works. I've signed many contracts over the years in States that I didn't live, and I was bound by those laws no matter where I went. If the players or NFLPA want to include an addenda to the contract which moves the venues to California, then go through the proper channels and get it done that way.

 

[Alan]

-X- dazed and confused:
Non-issue. An [existing] contract executed in Missouri is bound by Missouri law. If it happens to benefit the Rams, then so what. That's just how it works. I've signed many contracts over the years in States that I didn't live, and I was bound by those laws no matter where I went. If the players or NFLPA want to include an addenda to the contract which moves the venues to California, then go through the proper channels and get it done that way.

Are you sure you're reading the article correctly? Here's what I read:
"Per a league source, contracts being offered to new players state that the laws of Missouri, not California, control the relationship. The NFL Players Association has in turn instructed all certified contract agents to reject that term as “inappropriate.”

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehwSEVbBZl4

 

[-X-]

Are you sure you're reading the article correctly? Here's what I read:
"Per a league source, contracts being offered to new players state that the laws of Missouri, not California, control the relationship. The NFL Players Association has in turn instructed all certified contract agents to reject that term as “inappropriate.”

I read the rumor, yeah. But it was my understanding from reading it that this is from the contracts in effect right now:
“The parties hereto acknowledge that this Player Contract has been negotiated and executed in Missouri".

Now if they're trying to put that in new contracts that *aren't* being negotiated or executed in Missouri, then it would be invalid and easy to terminate.

 

[DaveFan'51]

If the state of Missouri deducted from their checks workmens comp, then they should be the ones to pay. Going forward, California will be deducting workmans comp and they will be on the hook for unemployment.

This^ sounds completely reasonable to me!!

 

[Rainram]

In terms of contract law this isn't really that rare of an occurrence.

Yup. There's really nothing to see here. Thanks for nothing...again...PFT.

 

[dieterbrock]

I read the rumor, yeah

My favorite part of the thread....
Right on X

 

[Mikey Ram]

This arrogant sort of "smartest guys in the room" vide I get from Snisher really needs to stop. It killed the team with the horrific Foles signing and continues here.
So, can a guy who has signed go back on the market now?
Idiots.

What would contract wording have to do with Snead and or Fisher ???

 

[Alan]

-X- explaining his interpretation:
I read the rumor, yeah. But it was my understanding from reading it that this is from the contracts in effect right now:
“The parties hereto acknowledge that this Player Contract has been negotiated and executed in Missouri".

I can see how you might take that view and you could be right. However, if you are correct then the part that I highlighted would make no sense. What I got from the article was that any contracts they started negotiating on or completed after the season ended could be considered to have been contracts that would be subject to the laws of Missouri. When did the the Rams "legally" move from Missouri to California? When the decision to "allow" them to move was approved by the vote of the other owners? After the moving vans completed (if the have completed) moving all the Ram property to California? Lots of gray here and I can see why the Rams organization might think they could legally get away with this. Obviously if they've officially/legally completed their move it would make no sense for the Rams to try this as, like you pointed out, it would never hold up in court. Let's see if the NFLPA wins their case.

 

[fearsomefour]

P

What would contract wording have to do with Snead and or Fisher ???

probably absolutely nothing.
I am the grumpy guy yelling at the kids to get off his lawn today

 

[12intheBox]

governing law is something bargained for in a sophisticated contract agreement - and it does, in fact, matter.

Certain state laws have more protection for employees and so employers typically want to steer clear of those forums when they can.

It's just business and all - but this wasn't an accidental thing and the NFLPA is right to warn their clients to object to the language.

 

[-X-]

When did the the Rams "legally" move from Missouri to California?

That's the $60,000 question.

I would imagine when they filed their corporate change of address.
Do they even have an office in California yet? I mean, a permanent one?

 

[Alan]

-X- with a known unknown:
Do they even have an office in California yet? I mean, a permanent one?

One thing is clear in this though, this Rams organization (Stan) isn't looking good on this. How greedy does he need to be? Just another example of why they are no longer my team.