|
Post by RI Richmark on Jan 1, 2015 6:37:27 GMT -5
The contracts now state that if a talent is fired for disciplinary reasons by the WWE that they forfeit all of their merchandise rights and are not allowed to work in professional wrestling or MMA for one year. How would that even work? The WWE can't tell another promotion who they can or can't sign.
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Jan 1, 2015 6:48:31 GMT -5
Silliness, if true.
|
|
The Unconquered Sun
King Koopa
He has no pants! What a heathen!
Lord of Storms and Kittens!
Posts: 11,548
|
Post by The Unconquered Sun on Jan 1, 2015 6:55:32 GMT -5
keep living those disillusions Vince
|
|
|
Post by EvenBaldobombHasAJob on Jan 1, 2015 7:21:54 GMT -5
yeah I call bullshit on this. you can't retroactively change someone's contract and you still have to pay them money owed even if you fire them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2015 7:38:45 GMT -5
yeah I call bullshit on this. you can't retroactively change someone's contract and you still have to pay them money owed even if you fire them. I assumed that the "changes" were being made to any and all new contracts signed simply because there's literally no way they can make these changes to current contracts. Unless, of course, they added an addendum, and even then we go right back to the fact that, even if the wrestler signs the updated contract, WWE isn't legally allowed to enforce the non-compete.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfman Rose on Jan 1, 2015 8:00:56 GMT -5
Not buying this at all. WWE legal ain't that stupid, and there isn't even a source on this story. It's just a statement of fact by the site like it's common knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by pepsitwist on Jan 1, 2015 9:04:24 GMT -5
They sound like the worst employers around for pro wrestlers. They need a union so badly.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Jan 1, 2015 9:10:15 GMT -5
WWE legal ain't that stupid Except for the fact they did it twice last year.
|
|
|
Post by aliciafoxfan on Jan 1, 2015 9:12:04 GMT -5
Really? that is so petty. How can they keep someone from making a living?
|
|
Sparkybob
King Koopa
I have a status?
Posts: 10,990
|
Post by Sparkybob on Jan 1, 2015 9:19:28 GMT -5
It's like everyone's expecting every release to be "disciplinary" from now on so they can withhold merch royalties, keep them from making money for a year and basically kill careers. Big Johnny is going to be planting so much cocaine in the lockerroom now.
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 28,902
|
Post by Sephiroth on Jan 1, 2015 9:29:44 GMT -5
WWE seems to have this thing about wrestlers parting on their own terms and going on to other things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2015 9:33:46 GMT -5
WWE thinks they can just throw whatever they want into a contract and as long as it's in the contract, there's nothing anyone can do about it. "If we fire you, we get to come over to your house and kick your kids in the face." Sadly, judging by what wrestlers put up with, I wouldn't be surprised if most of them happily agreed to these terms.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 1, 2015 9:33:54 GMT -5
All sound and fury, I doubt they'll stick by this if anyone actually challenges it. They don't want to go to court to justify "No working for 1 year anywhere" as a reasonable restriction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2015 9:36:06 GMT -5
They sound like the worst employers around for pro wrestlers. They need a union so badly. I agree, but it would kill WWE. They're cost cutting like crazy now... imagine what would happen if they were forced to pay fair wages, give health insurance, pay travel expenses etc. WWE's employees may want one, but WWE's employees don't want one. hell, here... your post inspired me. officialfan.proboards.com/thread/514735/wrestlers-union
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Jan 1, 2015 10:08:39 GMT -5
If true...good luck with that. Knowing them, they'd probably fire Heyman first, and he'd eviscerate them in court.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2015 10:08:57 GMT -5
WWE thinks they can just throw whatever they want into a contract and as long as it's in the contract, there's nothing anyone can do about it. "If we fire you, we get to come over to your house and kick your kids in the face." "Shouldn't have signed the contract man. Their company; their rules. You want to live your dream? Don't f*** it up or Ian is getting Cryonic Kicked."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2015 10:11:38 GMT -5
They sound like the worst employers around for pro wrestlers. They need a union so badly. I agree, but it would kill WWE. They're cost cutting like crazy now... imagine what would happen if they were forced to pay fair wages, give health insurance, pay travel expenses etc. WWE's employees may want one, but WWE's employees don't want one. hell, here... your post inspired me. officialfan.proboards.com/thread/514735/wrestlers-unionI imagine WWE's travel expense coverage would end up being like the movie "Major League", where you see footage of the entire roster grumbling while riding across the country in an old bus together.
|
|
|
Post by Rolent Tex on Jan 1, 2015 10:55:39 GMT -5
If true...good luck with that. Knowing them, they'd probably fire Heyman first, and he'd eviscerate them in court. In fact someone has already destroyed them in court. Mr. Heyman's client, the 1 in 21-1, the WWE World Heavyweight Champion....BRRRRROCK! LESSSSNARRRR!
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jan 1, 2015 11:04:20 GMT -5
Yeah, I feel like a good lawsuit would tear that apart fairly quickly.
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Jan 1, 2015 11:25:10 GMT -5
CM Punk already discussed at great length why something like this can't hold up, mainly because there's no way to enforce something like this on an independent contractor. I found it interesting on that interview where he basically said the current system is illegal anyway, since if you are an independent contracted person in any other line of business the person who hires you cannot mandate where you can work and why.
The whole idea of independent contractors is a relic of the territory era. Back then guys did just up and leave and weren't exclusive to any 1 company.
|
|