Oh here we go

guppy wrote:NFLPA expected to file grievance against Patriots over Aaron Hernandez’s unpaid $82,000 workout bonus.


Which leads me to the question: "How can you work out when you live in a 10 x 15 foot cell?



[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

George1963 wrote:

guppy wrote:NFLPA expected to file grievance against Patriots over Aaron Hernandez’s unpaid $82,000 workout bonus.


Which leads me to the question: "How can you work out when you live in a 10 x 15 foot cell?



[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

He'll get the workout bonus. And any remaining signing bonus that was agreed to. The Pats have tried this a couple of times before, although obviously not with a serial killer. A contract's a contract. You can't not honor it just because you don't want to. Not in this case anyway.


When did he workout?  When is the beginning point, and when is the end point of the "workout" period?  And was he there the whole time?  If yes, they probably have to pay it.  If he was absent (even if the reason for his absence was that he was released) the Pats may have a good argument that they don't owe it.

guppy wrote:

George1963 wrote:

guppy wrote:NFLPA expected to file grievance against Patriots over Aaron Hernandez’s unpaid $82,000 workout bonus.


Which leads me to the question: "How can you work out when you live in a 10 x 15 foot cell?



[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

He'll get the workout bonus. And any remaining signing bonus that was agreed to. The Pats have tried this a couple of times before, although obviously not with a serial killer. A contract's a contract. You can't not honor it just because you don't want to. Not in this case anyway.


When did he workout?  When is the beginning point, and when is the end point of the "workout" period?  And was he there the whole time?  If yes, they probably have to pay it.  If he was absent (even if the reason for his absence was that he was released) the Pats may have a good argument that they don't owe it.

George1963 wrote:

guppy wrote:

George1963 wrote:

guppy wrote:NFLPA expected to file grievance against Patriots over Aaron Hernandez’s unpaid $82,000 workout bonus.


Which leads me to the question: "How can you work out when you live in a 10 x 15 foot cell?



[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

He'll get the workout bonus. And any remaining signing bonus that was agreed to. The Pats have tried this a couple of times before, although obviously not with a serial killer. A contract's a contract. You can't not honor it just because you don't want to. Not in this case anyway.


When did he workout?  When is the beginning point, and when is the end point of the "workout" period?  And was he there the whole time?  If yes, they probably have to pay it.  If he was absent (even if the reason for his absence was that he was released) the Pats may have a good argument that they don't owe it.

The workouts start 4/15 and run through mandatory mini camp in the middle of June and according to the article you posted he did enough of it to qualify for the workout bonus.
He has further installments on his signing bonus coming and, as they well know, when you cut a guy you give up any right to try to recoup that.
They have to pay him.
Millions.


OK, I can see that.  However, I don't think its wise to talk in absolutes.  You never know what may happen in this case. 

What about violation of "morals" clauses voiding a contract, or at least certain parts of it?  Is that an argument the team has? 

The Atlanta Falcons sued Mike Vick for return of $20 Million in bonus after he was convicted.  But I think there was a court ruling that Vick could keep "most" of it.  So that is probably not good news for the Patriots. 

On the other hand, there are different interpretations of when a "morals" clause is triggered, and how it is drafted.  With Hernandez, the Pats are on new legal ground.  I can't think of any other morals cases in the sporting world where the athlete's bad conduct rose to the level of multiple first degree murders.  I see a possible new legal precedent coming based on the unique facts of this particular case.   Or at least some kind of mixed result.  No matter what, its not going to be resolved quickly.