Post by JohnM on Oct 5, 2013 10:59:21 GMT -5
A Frustrated Rodriguez Turns on the Players Union
By SERGE F. KOVALESKI and STEVE EDER
First, it was Alex Rodriguez against Major League Baseball. Next, it was Rodriguez versus the Yankees, his own team. Then Rodriguez found himself at odds with the players union that is supposed to be representing him.
In late August, Rodriguez grew so frustrated with how the Major League Baseball Players Association was defending him — or, as he saw it, not defending him — that his personal legal team wrote a letter formally requesting the union step aside from its prescribed role as his chief representative on his arbitration panel. It was an unusual acknowledgment that Rodriguez did not trust the union to look after his best interest, and he wanted to pick his own representative.
The move represented a significant escalation in the continuing battle over Rodriguez’s 211-game suspension, the longest doping penalty ever issued by Major League Baseball. The letter portrays Rodriguez as increasingly on his own, mistrustful of his accusers, the arbitration process and even the union lawyers assigned to defend him.
The letter, which was obtained by The New York Times and has not been previously reported, was dated Aug. 22 and sent on the letterhead of Reed Smith, one of three law firms representing Rodriguez. In it, Rodriguez’s lawyers notified the players association that they believed the union failed to “fairly represent his interests” regarding Major League Baseball’s investigation of Biogenesis of America, a South Florida anti-aging clinic that baseball officials say dispensed banned substances to ballplayers, including Rodriguez.
The letter argued that the players association had missed opportunities to challenge baseball officials’ aggressive investigative tactics; that the union had not strongly enough condemned baseball’s “gratuitous leaks” to the news media; and, most pointedly, that Michael Weiner, the union’s executive director, had publicly compromised Rodriguez’s position in a radio interview when he signaled that Rodriguez should have accepted some type of suspension “based on the evidence we saw.” Rodriguez and his personal lawyers have steadfastly maintained that Rodriguez should not have been suspended.
The union “has made matters worse by failing to protest M.L.B.’s thuggish tactics in its investigation, including paying individuals to produce documents and to testify on M.L.B.’s behalf, and bullying and intimidating those individuals who refuse to cooperate with their ‘witch hunt’ against the players — indeed principally Mr. Rodriguez,” the letter said.
The four-page letter was addressed to David Prouty, the players association’s general counsel. It aimed to replace the union’s lawyer for a crucial arbitration hearing regarding the suspension.
It was unclear how the union responded, but the letter apparently proved unsuccessful. At the hearing, which began last week and will continue in mid-October, Prouty served on the arbitration panel as Rodriguez’s representative. The other members of the panel are Robert Manfred, a senior executive in Major League Baseball, and Fredric Horowitz, an independent arbitrator appointed by both sides.
The arrangement with Prouty could add ammunition to Rodriguez’s arguments that he has been persecuted in the Biogenesis doping scandal, which has ensnared 13 other players.
In a statement, the players union said: “The union respects the confidentiality provisions of the Joint Drug Agreement, and believes all parties involved in the process should as well. Therefore, we will refrain from making any public comment at this time. Instead, we will continue to focus our attention on defending the rights of Alex Rodriguez and all union members during this grievance procedure.”
Manfred declined to comment on most of the letter’s contents but did address the claim that baseball had leaked information to the news media about Rodriguez. He said it was “just ridiculous” to assume that baseball officials were responsible for various leaks in light of the numerous parties involved in the case.
Major League Baseball has steadfastly defended its investigative tactics in the Biogenesis case, calling them standard.
Rodriguez, 38, is owed $86 million on his contract with the Yankees, and the suspension, if served in full, would cost him roughly $32 million in lost earnings. Perhaps equally important, Rodriguez’s legacy as one of the greatest players of his generation is also at stake.
For baseball, Rodriguez’s ban is the most prominent example of the league’s efforts to fight doping. An overturned suspension would be an embarrassment for Commissioner Bud Selig.
Rodriguez has long argued that baseball officials have sought to destroy his career and his reputation. Late Thursday, he filed a lawsuit against Major League Baseball saying that among other misdeeds, the league’s investigators paid money to gain the cooperation of Anthony Bosch, the founder of Biogenesis. (Baseball officials said they “vehemently deny the allegations.”) He went a step further on Friday, suing a doctor who treated him for a hip injury last year.
Rodriguez’s charges against baseball may have been familiar, but the dispute with his union was new.
The letter argued that the union “improperly stood idly by” while baseball officials filed “a sham lawsuit” against Biogenesis in March. The lawsuit, still pending in Miami, was a smokescreen to “procure evidence by means not otherwise available to it,” the lawyers wrote.
The lawyers added that their “greatest concern” was Weiner’s interview on XM Radio on Aug 6. in which he said that he had advised Rodriguez to accept a suspension of an undisclosed number of games.
“I don’t want to give a number,” Weiner said in the interview, “but there was a number that I gave A-Rod and advised him to take it, and he was never given that number.”
Rodriguez’s lawyers said the remark denigrated Rodriguez and could “irretrievably corrupt the arbitration process.”
“Such statements are clearly inconsistent with the M.L.B.P.A.’s duty to fairly and ardently represent Mr. Rodriguez,” they wrote.
By SERGE F. KOVALESKI and STEVE EDER
First, it was Alex Rodriguez against Major League Baseball. Next, it was Rodriguez versus the Yankees, his own team. Then Rodriguez found himself at odds with the players union that is supposed to be representing him.
In late August, Rodriguez grew so frustrated with how the Major League Baseball Players Association was defending him — or, as he saw it, not defending him — that his personal legal team wrote a letter formally requesting the union step aside from its prescribed role as his chief representative on his arbitration panel. It was an unusual acknowledgment that Rodriguez did not trust the union to look after his best interest, and he wanted to pick his own representative.
The move represented a significant escalation in the continuing battle over Rodriguez’s 211-game suspension, the longest doping penalty ever issued by Major League Baseball. The letter portrays Rodriguez as increasingly on his own, mistrustful of his accusers, the arbitration process and even the union lawyers assigned to defend him.
The letter, which was obtained by The New York Times and has not been previously reported, was dated Aug. 22 and sent on the letterhead of Reed Smith, one of three law firms representing Rodriguez. In it, Rodriguez’s lawyers notified the players association that they believed the union failed to “fairly represent his interests” regarding Major League Baseball’s investigation of Biogenesis of America, a South Florida anti-aging clinic that baseball officials say dispensed banned substances to ballplayers, including Rodriguez.
The letter argued that the players association had missed opportunities to challenge baseball officials’ aggressive investigative tactics; that the union had not strongly enough condemned baseball’s “gratuitous leaks” to the news media; and, most pointedly, that Michael Weiner, the union’s executive director, had publicly compromised Rodriguez’s position in a radio interview when he signaled that Rodriguez should have accepted some type of suspension “based on the evidence we saw.” Rodriguez and his personal lawyers have steadfastly maintained that Rodriguez should not have been suspended.
The union “has made matters worse by failing to protest M.L.B.’s thuggish tactics in its investigation, including paying individuals to produce documents and to testify on M.L.B.’s behalf, and bullying and intimidating those individuals who refuse to cooperate with their ‘witch hunt’ against the players — indeed principally Mr. Rodriguez,” the letter said.
The four-page letter was addressed to David Prouty, the players association’s general counsel. It aimed to replace the union’s lawyer for a crucial arbitration hearing regarding the suspension.
It was unclear how the union responded, but the letter apparently proved unsuccessful. At the hearing, which began last week and will continue in mid-October, Prouty served on the arbitration panel as Rodriguez’s representative. The other members of the panel are Robert Manfred, a senior executive in Major League Baseball, and Fredric Horowitz, an independent arbitrator appointed by both sides.
The arrangement with Prouty could add ammunition to Rodriguez’s arguments that he has been persecuted in the Biogenesis doping scandal, which has ensnared 13 other players.
In a statement, the players union said: “The union respects the confidentiality provisions of the Joint Drug Agreement, and believes all parties involved in the process should as well. Therefore, we will refrain from making any public comment at this time. Instead, we will continue to focus our attention on defending the rights of Alex Rodriguez and all union members during this grievance procedure.”
Manfred declined to comment on most of the letter’s contents but did address the claim that baseball had leaked information to the news media about Rodriguez. He said it was “just ridiculous” to assume that baseball officials were responsible for various leaks in light of the numerous parties involved in the case.
Major League Baseball has steadfastly defended its investigative tactics in the Biogenesis case, calling them standard.
Rodriguez, 38, is owed $86 million on his contract with the Yankees, and the suspension, if served in full, would cost him roughly $32 million in lost earnings. Perhaps equally important, Rodriguez’s legacy as one of the greatest players of his generation is also at stake.
For baseball, Rodriguez’s ban is the most prominent example of the league’s efforts to fight doping. An overturned suspension would be an embarrassment for Commissioner Bud Selig.
Rodriguez has long argued that baseball officials have sought to destroy his career and his reputation. Late Thursday, he filed a lawsuit against Major League Baseball saying that among other misdeeds, the league’s investigators paid money to gain the cooperation of Anthony Bosch, the founder of Biogenesis. (Baseball officials said they “vehemently deny the allegations.”) He went a step further on Friday, suing a doctor who treated him for a hip injury last year.
Rodriguez’s charges against baseball may have been familiar, but the dispute with his union was new.
The letter argued that the union “improperly stood idly by” while baseball officials filed “a sham lawsuit” against Biogenesis in March. The lawsuit, still pending in Miami, was a smokescreen to “procure evidence by means not otherwise available to it,” the lawyers wrote.
The lawyers added that their “greatest concern” was Weiner’s interview on XM Radio on Aug 6. in which he said that he had advised Rodriguez to accept a suspension of an undisclosed number of games.
“I don’t want to give a number,” Weiner said in the interview, “but there was a number that I gave A-Rod and advised him to take it, and he was never given that number.”
Rodriguez’s lawyers said the remark denigrated Rodriguez and could “irretrievably corrupt the arbitration process.”
“Such statements are clearly inconsistent with the M.L.B.P.A.’s duty to fairly and ardently represent Mr. Rodriguez,” they wrote.