Josh Gordon Facing Another Indefinite Supspension.. "Steps Away" from Pats

[Harbingers]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

No arbitrator is going to invalidates an entire CBA so one guy can smoke weed.

That’s not how a CBA and Abritration works. Have you ever worked for a union?

[WarHeel]

2 minutes ago, Asurfaholic said:

Did anyone show up stoned? Or just a trace of something left over in his system from 2 weeks ago?

 

Would be interesting to know if he was high at any point during meetings for sure. But that’s besides the point because “traces” of alcohol are not considered illegal.

[thefuzz]

This is 100% on the players.

Force the NFL to remove the weed testing from the CBA.  You have a chance coming up soon.  Let's see if they get it right this time.

Strip some of Roger's punishment abilities, and strip marijuana out of the testing process.

It ain't that hard to understand.

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, Harbingers said:

That’s not how a CBA and Abritration works. Have you ever worked for a union?

Yes, I have. And I know this case would get laughed at.

It doesn't matter how desperately you want this to happen. It's not going to happen.

[Harbingers]

1 minute ago, WarHeel said:

If we are saying they partake in alcohol but know how to control themselves I would say that’s acceptable as it’s legal for those over 21. Showing up to work intoxicated is another story. 

Let’s say that it isn’t 1-2 beers. Let’s say it’s at Addictive levels. 12+ beers a night or 6+ mixed drinks. 

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, thefuzz said:

This is 100% on the players.

Force the NFL to remove the weed testing from the CBA.  You have a chance coming up soon.  Let's see if they get it right this time.

Strip some of Roger's punishment abilities, and strip marijuana out of the testing process.

It ain't that hard to understand.

Apparently it is 

[Harbingers]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

Yes, I have. And I know this case would get laughed at.

It doesn't matter how desperately you want this to happen. It's not going to happen.

I’m curious, you don’t have to list local number or anything but which union was your representation?

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, Harbingers said:

I’m curious, you don’t have to list local number or anything but which union was your representation?

It wasn't in NC.

[Harbingers]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

It wasn't in NC.

Have you ever been to arbitration? Or involved in one?

[Lumps]

39 minutes ago, TheRed said:

Jangler trying to talk down to anyone about obeying laws is rich considering his past remarks about preteens here.

Can't speak for them, but for me it has absolutely nothing to do with any kind of laws; has everything to do with what's at stake.

[WarHeel]

5 minutes ago, Harbingers said:

Let’s say that it isn’t 1-2 beers. Let’s say it’s at Addictive levels. 12+ beers a night or 6+ mixed drinks. 

Then I’d say that person has a problem as well. Morally speaking, for me, these things are equal. Legally speaking, Josh’s case is deemed worse. Not saying this is fair; just stating facts.

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, Harbingers said:

Have you ever been to arbitration? Or involved in one?

I worked under a union, but also worked in management where we had a full seminar with company lawyers that went over everything a union could, and couldn't, do.

Bottom Line: The NFL's CBA bans marijuana use and allows for suspensions when someone fails a test. The players and the players association agreed to this.

That's not changing just for Josh Gordon, no matter how much you want it to.

[Harbingers]

5 minutes ago, WarHeel said:

Then I’d say that person has a problem as well. Morally speaking, for me, these things are equal. Legally speaking, Josh’s case is deemed worse. Not saying this is fair; just stating facts.

Perfect. That’s exactly what I was expecting. What was that running backs name? The one who played for Pittsburg and NE?

[Lumps]

Also blaming Goodell, the NFL etc... is asinine and ignorant.

This is an insurance and liability issue. It's the reason if almost any company randomly drug screened, and if positive, you'd lose your job. It's the reason for most jobs you're tested when there is some sort of wreck or accident. It's the reason contract type employees like waiters for instance, aren't tested, because they're not really 'employees' and never have benefits etc.

The issue is, in the work place, no one wants to take a liability because when something goes wrong or happens and the company has documentation a person was employed while using any drug, all of a sudden people blame the company, the brand whatever it may be and it can literally cost the company millions.

No one talking about what's legal and what isn't; moral compasses and what not, it's all about liability/reputation and for good reason.