PDA

View Full Version : MLBPA Challenging Chacon's Release



Brutus
07-01-2008, 05:50 PM
Union Says Astros Released Chacon Without Cause (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3469541)

Per ESPN:

NEW YORK -- The players' association filed a grievance Tuesday over the release of pitcher Shawn Chacon, saying the team's decision to terminate his contract was without just cause.

Chacon cleared waivers and was released Monday, five days after a physical altercation with Houston Astros general manager Ed Wade in the clubhouse.

Chacon had a $2 million salary this year, and the decision to terminate the contract meant $983,607 won't be paid. He also lost the chance to make up to $1 million in performance bonuses based on innings.

"The grievance alleges that he was unlawfully terminated and asked that he be made whole," said Michael Weiner, the union's general counsel.

Another example of the ridiculous side of unions. For starters, perhaps I'm missing something, but I thought outright releases meant the player was still owed the salary for the rest of the season? If the player was picked up, I know the team making the waiver claim pays only the prorated portion of the league minimum with the releasing team covering the rest. Apparently, if a player is outright released, is the player not owed that money?

In any event, shoving your boss would get you fired at almost any job. I'm not sure why that's not grounds for termination.

steig
07-01-2008, 06:06 PM
I think the union has to file a grievance on his behalf if Chacon wants them to file one.

JWP
07-01-2008, 06:34 PM
There is no way that Chacon is going to win this. I'd be surprised if someone even bothers to look at the case.

If shoving your GM to the ground and trying to strangle him isn't solid grounds for release, then what is? Ed Wade could press charges against Chacon if he pleased; Chacon should consider just being released a gift. The fact that Chacon hasn't been disciplined in some form by the MLB is shocking to me. In other leagues someone like Chacon would have certainly faced further disciplinary action by now.

Shawn Chacon is a Major League Baseball player, but he's not in any way different from a regular person working a job. He got "fired" for acting like an idiot, like any other person would be if they decided to physically assault their boss. There's nothing to question here, no grievance that could rationally be filed. Chacon of all people should recognize this. Filing a grievance says "I don't think I did anything wrong." If Chacon wanted to get another gig in the big leagues, he'd be best off making a heartfelt apology and expressing his regret over his stupidity.

I'd like to hear what Chacon's case is, though, as it could provide some good laughs.

HeatherC1212
07-01-2008, 08:33 PM
I thought I read earlier today that this guy has been in trouble before too. That can't help his case if it's true and I can't see how any rational person would even think he has a case after he treated his GM that way. :eek:

HalMorrisRules
07-01-2008, 09:16 PM
perhaps I'm missing something, but I thought outright releases meant the player was still owed the salary for the rest of the season? If the player was picked up, I know the team making the waiver claim pays only the prorated portion of the league minimum with the releasing team covering the rest. Apparently, if a player is outright released, is the player not owed that money?

In this case the Astros released Chacon with cause, meaning it was for a specific reason just not performance, roster moves, etc.


The Astros said Chacon violated a provision in the UPC that states the player may be terminated if he shall "fail, refuse, or neglect to conform his personal conduct to the standards of good citizenship and good sportsmanship or to keep himself in first-class physical condition or to obey to the club's training rules."

Brutus
07-01-2008, 11:19 PM
In this case the Astros released Chacon with cause, meaning it was for a specific reason just not performance, roster moves, etc.

Thanks. So it's the "with cause" provision that allows them to avoid paying the remainder of the salary?