Last week Donte Stallworth, still currently a member Cleveland Browns, pled guilty to the alcohol-related vehicular death of a Miami area man in the early hours of the morning. As punishment, a Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge sentenced Stallworth to thirty (30) days in jail, several fines and a slew of other measures, including the permanent revocation of his license.

In defense to the Circuit Court Judge’s light sentence, the victim's family had urged him to quickly settle the matter and Stallworth had been extremely cooperative with police investigators since the incident occurred on March 13, 2009. An undisclosed financial settlement between Stallworth and the victim's family also contributed to the wide receiver's expeditious sentencing. At the time of arrest, Stallworth's blood alcohol level was reported to be at twice the State's legal limit. Under Florida's DUI Manslaughter and Vehicular Homicide statute, he could have been sentenced up to fifteen (15) years in prison.

At the time of sentencing, some had questioned the Judge’s leniency on Stallworth. However, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell had a different take on the conviction and wasted little time in levying an indefinite suspension against the former Tennessee standout. In the letter addressed to Stallworth, the Commissioner stated:

“The conduct reflected in your guilty plea resulted in the tragic loss of life and was inexcusable. While the criminal justice system has determined the legal consequences of this incident, it is my responsibility as NFL Commissioner to determine appropriate league discipline for your actions, which have caused irreparable harm to the victim and his family, your club, your fellow players and the NFL.

The conduct that led to your conviction plainly violates both the Personal Conduct and Substances of Abuse policies…[t]here is no reasonable dispute that your continued eligibility for participation at this time would undermine the integrity of and public confidence in our league. Accordingly, I have decided to suspend you indefinitely, effective immediately…”

Goodell’s brand of exacting discipline thus far has been well received by those in the media and other League critics. As ESPN’s Len Pasquarelli writes, “Goodell thinks in black and white.” There is a right answer and a wrong answer. Stallworth’s guilty plea was evidence enough of wrong doing; there are no mitigating factors. Goodell’s draconian style appears to be the hallmark of his League stewardship, which is a significant departure from his predecessor’s approach, Paul Tagliabue.

As mentioned above, Goodell handles player discipline issues radically different from Tagliabue, the seminal Commissioner who presided over nearly two decades of labor peace and billions of dollars in League revenue. During his time as Commissioner, from 1989 to 2006, it was Tagliabue who had the option of severely disciplining former Defensive Lineman Leonard Little, who was also convicted of Involuntary Manslaughter in 1998. However Tagliabue only penalized Little by suspending him for 8 (eight) games.

As Goodell mentioned in his letter to Stallworth, he as Commissioner is empowered to take appropriate action against those who engage in “conduct [that is] detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in the National Football League.” This authority is derived from, among a few areas, the League’s Personal Conduct Policy. Created in 2008, the Personal Conduct Policy gives the Commissioner seemingly unfettered power and discretion to discipline “all persons associated with the NFL” in a myriad of circumstances. Thus, this policy provides the NFL with a tool to quickly and definitively deal with public relations nightmares. However, the issue remains whether every disciplinary act made pursuant to the Personal Conduct Policy is a breach of the NFL’s collective bargaining agreement with the NFL Players Association (yes, the same CBA that NFL ownership opted out of in 2008).

One voice who has yet to publicly weigh in on Stallworth’s indefinite suspension and the validity of the Personal Conduct Policy is NFLPA Executive Director DeMaurice Smith. This is Smith’s first encounter with the Personal Conduct Policy. It remains to be seen whether Smith is planning on challenging the Policy under applicable labor law. Under labor law, mandatory subjects of bargaining, topics that effect terms and conditions of employment, must be agreed upon through the collective bargaining process. Player discipline certainly falls into this category, as discipline usually results in the loss of pay and or the inability to play football for a certain period of time.

The validity of the Personal Conduct Policy has never been directly challenged by the Players’ Union. However Gene Upshaw, the late Executive Director of the NFLPA, did have some issues with the Policy’s lack of a meaningful appeals process. As astutely pointed out by ESPN’s Chris Mortensen, when the Personal Conduct Policy was strengthened in 2008, Upshaw voiced concern over Goodell’s ability to suspend individuals longer than a year with little recourse.  He felt that lengthy suspensions should have been appealed to an independent arbitrator for decision.

Perhaps Mr. Upshaw had a point. It seems unfair for appeals to go to Commissoner Goodell, considering he is the individual responsible for the initial disciplinary action. Certainly, it is not a question of whether Goodell is setting precedent in regard to league discipline by his actions. Indefinite suspensions for conduct not currently covered in the CBA must be a part of the bargaining process. It is up the Union to challenge excessive discipline, if it is deemed to be so. But the question remains: Why hasn’t the Union objected publically?  

In the meantime, it appears that Goodell is comfortable with filling the role of disciplinarian when the court system seemingly does not do its part. The Union is mum in response, which seems to implicitly condone Goodell’s decision and the public seems to approve of the decision as well.

Although players did have some degree of involvement in designing the Personal Conduct Policy, that does not mean that it was a product of collective bargaining. The Union is not objecting to Goodell’s use of the Policy, but player discipline is an issue that both sides will negotiate over a potential lockout in 2011 nears.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed