Re: Baker clears waivers............

[Douglas342@xxxxxxx]

   Well, maybe now that the game has been played out, we might find out exactly what the deal was here.  I am interested not only in the alleged "three strikes" provision, but also in whether the Cs-Baker deal made any reference at all to Baker's rights under the CBA.  Can a player enter into a contract that waives benefits and protections of the CBA?  Did the union know about the Cs-Baker agreement?  Did the union sign off on it?  Might some rights remain under the CBA (cap, etc) and others be excluded by the side deal?  Inquiring minds want to know.  (Curious minds want to know what Vin did to bring himself to this point, but right now I am more interested in how this impacts the Cs and the cap.)

[end of questions; speculation follows]

     It seems to me, in general, that the union could well object to any "side deal" a member makes with his employer, as it opens the door to allowing the employer/teams to cutting "side deals" that undermine the CBA that union has fought for.  And this is from someone who took a course in labor law c. 1976, third year at good ol' Northeastern Law.  And who has forgotten 99% of it.
 - Doug

In a message dated 2/18/2004 2:41:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, Roger.Belanger@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:

> FYI, and so the battle begins...............
> 
> roger
> 
> 
> Baker clears waivers; Celtics terminate contract