Skip to main content

Brady Federal Deflategate Appeal: A Mediator's View

Tom Brady along with the National Football League Player's Association are currently in a federal lawsuit in a U.S. District Court against the National Football League.  The case centers on the appropriate use of power by the NFL commissioner to act as labor arbitrator, but is that really what it is about?

How did the loss of a small amount of air in a few footballs balloon into a federal case?  

Attorney James M. Lynch of Stevenson, Lynch & Owens, P.C. recently wrote an excellent post outlining the legal arguments that both sides have, and why, in his opinion, Brady has the stronger case: Brady Federal Deflategate Appeal: A Lawyer’s View.   As a lawyer, I found the analysis intriguing, but as a mediator, I wonder if the legal analysis of this case misses the point.

Tom Brady isn't in court to stand up for labor unions.  The fans and the public don't care that much about whether Roger Goodell's decision was consistent with the "practices of industry" or the collective bargaining agreement.  The settlement conference on August 12th outlined this disconnect because very little of the discussion was actually about the case law, yet that case law might control the outcome of the case.  So why even schedule two settlement conferences if they don't help decide the case?  Mediators know the answer: What someone is asking for is not always what they actually want.

Mediators are trained to actively listen in order to get to the interests that are underneath positions, to help figure out what both sides really want.  While the settlement conference was run by a Judge, and not a mediator, there were many similarities to mediation.

Courtroom Sketch of Settlement Conference by
Jane Rosenberg, Reuters/Deadspin
The lawyers for Tom Brady and the NFLPA at the August 12 settlement conference made small concessions in their arguments, for instance, allowing that maybe Brady should have cooperated more.  Why would they make any concession that could hurt their case?  It shows they're willing to settle, which is an invitation to the other side and also a signal to the Judge that they're trying to do what he wants them to do.  A willingness to settle is not a sign of weakness, but rather a recognition of the risks of fighting longer and the benefits of ending the dispute.

The NFL on the other hand, continued to point to the letter of the law in the CBA, refusing to acknowledge any of the weaknesses in their case that Judge Berman was pointing out.  This is not just a hard negotiating tactic.  It shows us something else about the NFL's interests in taking this matter to court.  For some reason the NFL wants to make an example of this particular case.  One possible reason is that Tom Brady is a high profile player, a chance for the league to show no-one is above "the law".  Another possible reason for the NFL fighting this case is a reaction (or over-reaction) to the significant amount of criticism the league has received in the past year over suspensions in other cases.

Recognizing that the NFL is more interested in the public relations battle than a court case is something the Patriots and the NFLPA seem to be missing or misinterpreting.   The Patriots have continued to release e-mails, and essentially fight the PR battle in an attempt to discredit the NFL.  From a lawyer's perspective that might make sense.  If the NFL loses then you win, right?

However, if what you really want is a settlement, that hopefully involves no games lost for your star quarterback, then fighting the PR battle is actually a bad move.  Every ding in the NFL's shield means they have to fight back harder.  It doesn't give them a reason to settle; it does exactly the opposite.

Mediators are trained to help parties find solutions where both parties can meet some or all of their goals.  There a solution here where the NFL and Tom Brady and the NFLPA all get what they want. In fact, there are multiple solutions that would be better for everyone involved than a lengthy trial.  The reason Judge Berman would schedule two settlement conferences right away is because he understands that possibility.  Now we will see if the NFL and Tom Brady understand that as well.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the purpose of the Divorce Nisi waiting period?

In Massachusetts the statutory waiting period after a Judgment of Divorce and before the divorce becomes final (or absolute) is called the Nisi period. After a divorce case settles or goes to trial, a Judgment of Divorce Nisi will issue and it will become Absolute after a further ninety (90) days.

This waiting period serves the purpose of allowing parties to change their mind before the divorce becomes final. If the Judgment of Divorce Nisi has issued but not become final yet, and you and your spouse decide you don't want to get divorced, then you can file a Motion to Dismiss and the Judgment will be undone. Although many of my clients who are getting divorced think the idea of getting back together with their ex sounds crazy, I have had cases where this happened.

In addition to offering a grace period to change your mind, the Nisi period has three other legal effects:

1. The most obvious effect of the waiting period is that you cannot remarry during the Nisi period, because…

Does a Criminal Record affect Child Custody?

If one of the parents in a custody case has a criminal record, the types of crimes on their record could have an effect on their chances of obtaining custody. In custody cases the issue is always going to come down to whether or not the best interests of the child might be affected.

In the most extreme case, in which one parent has been convicted of first degree murder of the other parent, the law specifically prohibits visitation with the children until they are of a suitable age to assent.

Similarly, but to a less serious degree, in making custody and visitation determinations the court will consider crimes that would cause one to question the fitness of a parent. These types of crimes would obviously include any violent crime convictions which could call into question whether the children would be in danger around a parent who has shown themselves to resort to violence when faced with conflict. In addition, drug and alcohol abuse offenses would call into question a parent'…

The Questions that Lawyers and Mediators aren't asking but should: Let's talk about Pronouns

I recently had the opportunity to train with two of the most prominent mediators in Massachusetts: John Fiske and Diane Neumann. Each time they run a training, John and Diane share what they think is the most important question for a client to answer to have an effective mediation. John says that he thought the most important question is "What do I want?" But then he will tell you, with a knowing smile, that Diane disagreed with him and she would say that the most important question for a client to answer is "Who am I?"

I agree with Diane. The best lawyers and mediators ask their clients not just about what they want, but also deep questions about the clients' identity, goals, and values in order to help the clients resolve conflict in the most effective way possible. Despite knowing this, we often fail to ask clients the simplest questions when we first meet them or have them fill out an intake. We fail to give them an opportunity to answer the question “Who …