April 30, 201412 yr If he had previously asked her to record their conversations, which is being reported, due to his aging memory, the recording is legal, correct? Yep
April 30, 201412 yr So if you were sitting at home and made the comments Sterling made, casually to a friend, and it got back to your boss, he'd have no grounds to fire you? Depends on your employment. If you are At-Will, it is see ya later, Sucka. If you are "for Cause," that would be tough to get away with. If you are in management, it sure would open up every one of your hiring/firing decisions and really all your decisions up to intense scrutiny.
April 30, 201412 yr I think a better analogy would be: The plant manager of a factory is at a private function and he makes several offensive comments about blacks, whites, gays, Jews and Christians. Word of what the plant manager says gets back to the factory and spreads like wildfire. The plant manager has a history of making offensive comments and even lost a labor case and settled out of court with a former employee who accused him of racism. Once word of the plant manger's comments get back to the entire plant the employees are upset and are contemplating walking out on the job. When confronted about those statements the plant manager admits to making the comments. What should be done? How many people are at the "private function" and what group is there? The past history, I'm with you, Sterling should have been gone years ago.
April 30, 201412 yr Anyone know when the owners vote? It's in the works now, no timetable that I have seen mentioned.
April 30, 201412 yr It isn't like they just said "hey everybody, raise your hand if you want to force Sterling out of the league." If it was that simple, he'd have been out of the league years ago... He made his bed. No doubt, but call it what it is, they're taking it away from him. It's against his will so the compensation does not change the nature of the transaction. I have seen estimates that it could cost him from $233 million to $333 million in additional taxes. As I said, I'm fine with it as it's part of the agreement he signed and the league has to have the ability to protect it's brand. I don't fret over racist billionaires.
April 30, 201412 yr So you think the league went through a poop-storm of negative publicity for three days and what figures to be months if not years of expensive court proceedings to orchestrate the ouster of a crummy owner and force the sale of the team to one of the game's most beloved figures? Seems pretty implausible. I think he was alluding to a setup by the girlfriend and Johnson. Still implausible but interesting if it were a book.
April 30, 201412 yr No doubt, but call it what it is, they're taking it away from him. It's against his will so the compensation does not change the nature of the transaction. I have seen estimates that it could cost him from $233 million to $333 million in additional taxes. As I said, I'm fine with it as it's part of the agreement he signed and the league has to have the ability to protect it's brand. I don't fret over racist billionaires. If I take something away from you, you don't get anything in return. Call it what it is. A forced sale of the franchise...
April 30, 201412 yr So if you were sitting at home and made the comments Sterling made, casually to a friend, and it got back to your boss, he'd have no grounds to fire you? Depends on a lot of things, most importantly the state you live in. You would collect unemployment though in any event.
April 30, 201412 yr If I take something away from you, you don't get anything in return. Call it what it is. A forced sale of the franchise... Wrong, it's still not in my possession against my will. That's taking. Compensation is not relevent, it's the taking against one's will. As I said, emminent domain is still taking.
April 30, 201412 yr They aren't taking anything against his will. The owners and the commissioner think he violated the league rules that he agreed to. You do that and you get da boot.
April 30, 201412 yr How many people are at the "private function" and what group is there? The past history, I'm with you, Sterling should have been gone years ago. Only one person affiliated with work. 6 people. 3 couples. Enjoying cold beverages and stogies around a fire in a backyard fire pit.
April 30, 201412 yr Only one person affiliated with work. 6 people. 3 couples. Enjoying cold beverages and stogies around a fire in a backyard fire pit. That's different than a phone conversation where there is only one other party. W/ each additional person, your EXPECTATION of PRIVACY (and that is what is key to my gripe) becomes less and less. While it is a private get together, it is still a public function as there are people there that are merely friends. You may feel comfortable with them, but it is different. It is a case-by-case deal, and in this case, and ESPECIALLY with his past history, he should be gone. He should have been gone after losing the previous legal battle. The difference here w/ Sterling is that he was having a one-on-one conversation over the phone. His expectation of privacy was heightened (unless he told her to record it, like UK said.) California Civil Code Section 1708.8 - California Attorney Resources - California Laws I'm guessing he'll be suing her if he did not give her permission.
April 30, 201412 yr To upset even more people, if I'm reading the code correctly, if Silver approved of these recordings and knew of the, the NBA could be in trouble.
April 30, 201412 yr Adam Silver is a lawyer and worked for one of the best law firms in the country. I'm confident he did what he could.
April 30, 201412 yr To upset even more people, if I'm reading the code correctly, if Silver approved of these recordings and knew of the, the NBA could be in trouble. What, so now you're saying Silver was in on it? What leads you to believe that?
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.