This is a huge development as the Falcons believed the $20 million should have been returned, but there were many who disagreed and I personally thought the organization's move was vindictive.
VICK CAN KEEP HIS BONUS
Judge David Doty, who presided over the landmark litigation that resulted in free agency and still retains jurisdiction over certain aspects of the administration of the 15-year-old system, has ruled that Falcons quarterback Mike Vick may keep more than $20 million in bonuses paid to him as part of his December 2004 contract extension.
The decision reverses the ruling of Special Master Stephen Burbank, whose decision to allow the Falcons to pursue the money was regarded as a surprise in the wake of a prior decision from Burbank regarding former Broncos receiver Ashley Lelie.
The ruling arises from a conclusion that roster bonuses are money earned in the year in which they are paid. In contrast, a signing bonus is earned over the period of years in which the money is allocated under the salary cap.
The twist in the Vick case was that the team reserved the right to convert the roster bonus payments to guaranteed amounts, which then triggered proration. But the fact that the money was paid out as a roster bonus, according to Judge Doty, exempts it from forfeiture.
In the Lelie case, Burbank found that an option bonus was not subject to forfeiture, even though an option bonus is essentially a signing bonus that comes due at some date after signing. The second time around, Burbank focused on an argument that the league didn't make in the Lelie case in finding that a roster bonus is subject to forfeiture.
The Falcons have the ability to appeal the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days. Thereafter, the appellate court would set a briefing schedule, and argument would follow several months later. Ultimately, the losing party may attempt to persuade the United States Supreme Court to take up the issue. However, the Supreme Court takes up only a small percentage of proposed appeals.
Vick currently is serving a prison term for violation of federal conspiracy laws relating to gambling and dog fighting.
Showing posts with label vick bonus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vick bonus. Show all posts
Monday, February 04, 2008
Friday, October 05, 2007
Jeffrey Kessler - Michael Vick Can Retain $22 Million Due To New Collective Bargaining Agreement
Jeffrey Kessler, NFL Players Association Lawyer acting in representation of Michael Vick, made the argument that the extention of the NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement prohibited returning $22 Million to the Atlanta Falcons.
From what I read of the NFL CBA, Kessler's right. Look at this:
Section 9. Limitations on Salary Forfeitures:
(a) No forfeitures of signing bonuses shall be permitted, except that players and Clubs may agree: (i)
to proportionate forfeitures of a signing bonus if a player voluntarily retires or willfully withholds his
services from one or more regular season games; and/or (ii) that if a player willfully takes action that has
the effect of substantially undermining his ability to fully participate and contribute in either preseason
training camp or the regular season (including by willfully withholding his services in either preseason
training camp or during the regular season or willfully missing one or more games), the player may forfeit
the greater of: (a) 25% of the prorated portion of his signing bonus for the applicable League Year for the
first time such conduct occurs after the beginning of training camp until the end of the season for his Club,
and the remaining 75% prorated portion of his signing bonus for the applicable year for the second time
such conduct occurs during that period that year; or (b) the proportionate amount of his signing bonus
allocation for each week missed (1/17th for each regular season week or game missed).
(b) If a player with a signing bonus forfeiture clause voluntarily retires and misses the remainder of
the season, and the player then reports back to the Club in the subsequent season, then the Club must either
(i) take the player back under his existing contract with no forfeiture of the remaining proportionate signing
bonus allocation, or (ii) release the player and seek repayment of any remaining proportion of the signing
bonus allocated to future League Years.
(c) No forfeitures permitted (current and future contracts) for signing bonus allocations for years
already performed, or for other salary escalators or performance bonuses already earned.
(d) A player’s right to receive and/or retain a signing bonus may not be conditioned on the player’s
participation in voluntary off-season programs or voluntary minicamps, or for adverse public statements,
provided that the Club may have non-proratable participation bonuses for its off-season workout program.
(e) Player Contracts may not contain individually negotiated provisions for forfeiture relating to
violations of the Policy on Anabolic Steroids and Related Substances or the NFL Policy and Program for
Substances of Abuse (which policies will address this issue), or for failing any drug test.
(f) Except as provided above, existing contract forfeiture provisions entered into before the end of
the 2005 regular season will be in full force and effect for the duration of the current contract, and any
extensions resulting solely from effectuation of existing contract provision (e.g., option years). If a Player
Contract with a forfeiture provision entered into before the end of the 2005 regular season is otherwise
extended or renegotiated, the amount of Salary agreed to in the contract prior to its extension or
renegotiation shall be subject to forfeiture to the same extent as provided prior to such extension or renegotiation.
(g) For purposes of this Section 9, the terms “proportionate forfeitures” and “proportionate amount”
mean 1/17th of that year’s signing bonus allocation for each regular season week or game missed.
If you take a look at this, there's a particular section that could doom the Falcons attempts to recover the $22 million signing bonus. It's this:
(c) No forfeitures permitted (current and future contracts) for signing bonus allocations for years
already performed, or for other salary escalators or performance bonuses already earned.
The issue is over bonus money Vick's already made based on performance, not money he's due to collect. So the Falcons are going to lose this round. Indeed, I personally think they're being terrible in their pursuit of this money he deservedly earned under the CBA.
From what I read of the NFL CBA, Kessler's right. Look at this:
Section 9. Limitations on Salary Forfeitures:
(a) No forfeitures of signing bonuses shall be permitted, except that players and Clubs may agree: (i)
to proportionate forfeitures of a signing bonus if a player voluntarily retires or willfully withholds his
services from one or more regular season games; and/or (ii) that if a player willfully takes action that has
the effect of substantially undermining his ability to fully participate and contribute in either preseason
training camp or the regular season (including by willfully withholding his services in either preseason
training camp or during the regular season or willfully missing one or more games), the player may forfeit
the greater of: (a) 25% of the prorated portion of his signing bonus for the applicable League Year for the
first time such conduct occurs after the beginning of training camp until the end of the season for his Club,
and the remaining 75% prorated portion of his signing bonus for the applicable year for the second time
such conduct occurs during that period that year; or (b) the proportionate amount of his signing bonus
allocation for each week missed (1/17th for each regular season week or game missed).
(b) If a player with a signing bonus forfeiture clause voluntarily retires and misses the remainder of
the season, and the player then reports back to the Club in the subsequent season, then the Club must either
(i) take the player back under his existing contract with no forfeiture of the remaining proportionate signing
bonus allocation, or (ii) release the player and seek repayment of any remaining proportion of the signing
bonus allocated to future League Years.
(c) No forfeitures permitted (current and future contracts) for signing bonus allocations for years
already performed, or for other salary escalators or performance bonuses already earned.
(d) A player’s right to receive and/or retain a signing bonus may not be conditioned on the player’s
participation in voluntary off-season programs or voluntary minicamps, or for adverse public statements,
provided that the Club may have non-proratable participation bonuses for its off-season workout program.
(e) Player Contracts may not contain individually negotiated provisions for forfeiture relating to
violations of the Policy on Anabolic Steroids and Related Substances or the NFL Policy and Program for
Substances of Abuse (which policies will address this issue), or for failing any drug test.
(f) Except as provided above, existing contract forfeiture provisions entered into before the end of
the 2005 regular season will be in full force and effect for the duration of the current contract, and any
extensions resulting solely from effectuation of existing contract provision (e.g., option years). If a Player
Contract with a forfeiture provision entered into before the end of the 2005 regular season is otherwise
extended or renegotiated, the amount of Salary agreed to in the contract prior to its extension or
renegotiation shall be subject to forfeiture to the same extent as provided prior to such extension or renegotiation.
(g) For purposes of this Section 9, the terms “proportionate forfeitures” and “proportionate amount”
mean 1/17th of that year’s signing bonus allocation for each regular season week or game missed.
If you take a look at this, there's a particular section that could doom the Falcons attempts to recover the $22 million signing bonus. It's this:
(c) No forfeitures permitted (current and future contracts) for signing bonus allocations for years
already performed, or for other salary escalators or performance bonuses already earned.
The issue is over bonus money Vick's already made based on performance, not money he's due to collect. So the Falcons are going to lose this round. Indeed, I personally think they're being terrible in their pursuit of this money he deservedly earned under the CBA.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)