Posted by
"Happy" Jake Greene on Tuesday, July 28, 2009 6:49:58 AM
I do realize this isn’t a sports blog. With that said, I do have a few comments about the Michael Vick situation that are more fitting to this forum. But first some background.
Michael Vick was a well-known quarterback for the National Football League (NFL)’s Atlanta Falcons. While not the best player at that position, he was certainly one of the most entertaining, and professional sports being a form of entertainment, that made him a recognizable presence in the league. Two years ago, it came out that he was running an illegal dog-fighting and gambling ring from his home. The details are available from dozens of locations, so I’ll keep it brief. He was prosecuted and imprisoned for two years and officially suspended from the NFL indefinitely. Yesterday, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell stipulated the terms by which Vick was to be reinstated this year. The terms are complex and, in the simplest phrasing, he will essentially be disqualified, with pay, from playing in the first several (an indeterminate number so far) games in the regular season while being allowed to participate in practices, meetings, training camp and other team activities.
Of course there is a great amount of opinion out there concerning this decision by the league. Most of it is in favor of Vick. I’m not here to weigh in on my opinion of the decision, because, frankly, I don’t have a strong feeling about it either way. I’m more concerned about some of the more widespread expressions of opinion I’ve heard recently, which speak to an alarming ignorance about rights, and responsibilities both for an individual and a private organization.
The first thing I want to point out was a caller to a radio program who claimed that Vick was the victim of “double jeopardy.” The caller posited that since Vick had been suspended before his indictment two years ago, and will again be “suspended” (though Goodell has said it is not a suspension because Vick will be paid and allowed to participate in practice should he sign with a team) now that he has “paid his debt to society.” What was missed by the host and the caller was that double jeopardy is a provision in the constitution to be applied to criminal prosecutions. If a man is found innocent of a crime, he cannot be tried again. If the courts were to “re-open” the OJ Simpson case, that would be double jeopardy, and would be illegal under the Constitution. The Constitution does not apply to private organizations. A company can uphold any disciplinary policy it chooses so long as the law is not broken. Setting rules and conditions for someone returning to their old job after they had been in prison is well within the rights of a private company, which the NFL is.
Another point that comes up frequently in suspension cases, particularly those involving long suspensions for egregious acts is the ever-popular “you can’t take away a man’s livelihood.” Oh, yes you can, if you are his employer. And some employers can make it very difficult to get another decent job. A soldier who, for example, willfully disobeys an order from a superior commissioned officer can be dishonorably discharged (among other punishments). A dishonorable discharge, particularly for insubordination, can make it difficult to find a decent job. Sure, you can dig ditches or pick strawberries, but so can your average illegal immigrant. You cannot get other federal employment, or anything that requires a security clearance, and a lot of companies won’t hire those dishonorably discharged from the service.
Further down the line, most careers have certain offenses that can cost you. For a doctor, gross negligence or willful malpractice can cost your medical license. For Lawyers, any number of crimes, and particularly ethical violations – such as prosecuting an innocent for a crime you know full well was never committed – can get you disbarred. In sports, gambling or doing other things that affect the perceived integrity of the game can get you essentially blacklisted. Employers can and do take away people’s livelihoods for misconduct all the time.
Then there’s the whole “paid his debt to society” thing. Your debt to society has nothing to do with how your employer treats you. Some people owe no “debt to society” insofar as criminal justice is concerned, but they may be disruptive employees and the employer has the right to terminate them. Doing something that reflects poorly on a company gives that company the right not to employ you. And bad company reputations last well beyond any misconduct. The NFL allowing Vick to play free-and-clear from the beginning of the season without any strings attached would be perverted by PETA and other animal rights groups as tacit approval for dog-fighting. It’s worth noting that such groups had called for his immediate and permanent suspension from the League before it was clear that he was directly involved.
You may or may not agree with Vick’s suspension, or his reinstatement, or the conditions that were applied, or whatever. It’s perfectly reasonable for you to believe he should be fully reinstated now, or that he should be suspended for life, a la Pete Rose (interesting how none of these arguments are ever applied to him, isn’t it?). You can say what you want about Vick, Goodell, the NFL, or anyone else involved. Heck, you could think that dog-fighting is an inalienable right that should be available to all Americans for all I care. I’m just tired of the same old, uneducated, oversimplified arguments that come up every time some athlete does something stupid.