Quote:
Originally Posted by Wite3
Again,
Voiding contracts for PED use might be problematic. The athlete can then declare an addiction which is a protected class and cannot be fired under the ADA as they are not "at will" employees and if they seek treatment...lawyers help me out here...
Many of the contracts now employed by the MLB teams and the CBA do allow the void of contracts due to moral issues including lying which is rather easy to prove because if you are using a banned substance when you negotiated (or re-negotiated) your contract, you were not bargaining in good faith.
It is very complicated and I am just a teacher but I do have some familiarity with some of the cases here and know a bunch about ADA, Hippa, and CBAs.
Joshua
|
It has been a few years since I did employment law but here is my 2 cents. Frequently endorsements contains moral clauses. You could include that but it seems problematic. I think something a bit safer would be to in lude a clause that makes the contract voidable or reducable at the option of the club if you have a positive test.