Connecticut Employment Lawyer & Attorney : Daniel Schwartz : Stamford, Hartford New Haven, CT

Today is the final day of the General Assembly and the Paid Sick Leave proposal (S.B. 217) is expected to come before the House before the close of business.  But, perhaps in a sign that it is doomed to die a procedural death, it has drawn nearly 25 proposed amendments.  

One of the listed amendments is just a head scratcher.  Specifically, House Amendment 6092 (proposed by House Republican Leader Lawrence Cafero and Rep. Aman) would, in essence, allow employees to use paid sick leave for the first day of summer, the first day of fishing or hunting season, or, and I kid you not, the opening day of baseball season. 

Don't believe me? Here's the actual language:  

(e) No employer shall require documentation of an illness, injury or health condition, as described in subsection (b) of this section, if the employee uses a paid sick day on the twenty-first day of the month of June, the first day of a sport-fishing or hunting season authorized pursuant to chapter 26 of the general statutes, or the opening day of the official Major League Baseball season. " 

Thus, under this amendment, an employee could take the day off to attend the Opening Day of baseball season, and the employer would just have to "take the employee's word" that the day was a paid sick leave day.  The Office of Fiscal Analysis even issued a one sentence report indicating that it would have no "fiscal impact" in the state.

Because the proposal comes from two Republican lawmakers (who, as a group, have expressed skepticism about the bill), I think it's fair to say that this proposal will go nowhere. Maybe it is just being used to make a point that the paid sick leave bill will be difficult to enforce. But, given the ramifications of the Paid Sick Leave act bill, as I've covered before, one has to wonder what they were thinking in taking the time to draft an actual amendment on this topic.

The General Assembly starts again this morning. Grab your popcorn. Should be a fun last day.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Lately, the best soap opera in the area has been the on-again, off-again negotiations between Alex Rodriguez (otherwise known as A-Rod) and the New York Yankees. As a Yankees and baseball fan, it has provided lots of drama already in the offseason.  But the case has also provided a very good example of how to handle difficult negotiations. Whether it is for hiring or retaining a star worker, or negotiating a difficult settlement, there are some good lessons that we often preach, that show up here.

First, the background, as provided in two excellent posts by The Word on Employment Law which can be found here and here.   Essentially, Alex Rodriguez -- a three-time Most Valuable Player award winner who had one of the best regular seasons ever for a baseball player -- decided to opt out of his current  contract to negotiate a new deal.  The Yankees -- who were willing to negotiate with A-Rod as long as he didn't opt out because of some money they would receive from another ballclub -- had told him that if he opted out, they would not negotiate with him further.  When A-Rod opted out, the Yankees stuck to their word and cut ties with him.  The Yankees also said that they would not overpay him.

By press accounts, A-Rod was surprised by the results and perhaps surprised by the tepid market reaction to his free agency.  Thus, after apparently receiving advice from Warren Buffett , A-Rod did a unique thing -- he reached out to the Yankees personally, instead of letting his agent handle it.  And  the Yankees responded by encouraging him to have a face-to-face meeting with Senior Vice President Hank Steinbrenner (George's son).  After that, the two parties hammered out their differences in short order and are in the final stages of getting a new 10-year, $275 million contract signed. 

So what can HR professionals and in-house lawyers take away from this series of events? Plenty.

• Allow a party to save face to salvage negotiations.  When A-Rod reached out to the Yankees directly regarding restarting negotiations, the Yankees could've played hardball by saying no and leaking it to the press. They didn't.  Instead, they allowed the discussions to continue in private and until a framework could be established. They didn't pour salt in open wounds by calling A-Rod names for his opt-out, even with "anonymous sources".   Listen to this quote from Hank Steinbrenner shortly after word on the negotiations became public:

"Everyone seems to be pleased about it. I'm certainly pleased. Despite some cynical attitudes there may be over the next few weeks, Alex genuinely does not want to leave the team, and you really can't blame him, because we've got the talent to win. "

Doesn't sound like someone who is bitter; and it allowed A-Rod to save face and rejoin the Yankees.

• Don't nickel & dime. Ok, so with millions of dollars at stake, it's more than a few coins. But when A-Rod came back, the Yankees didn't restart negotiations at a much lower level (they did take into account the money that was lost by the opt-out but that makes some sense).  There is a tendency on some parties to nickel and dime at the end just to try to get the absolute best deal -- no matter what the cost is to the other side. But as another lawyer once told me, in words appropriate to the occassion, "when you get in the ballpark, get the deal done".   Getting a deal done for a fair value that you can live with that won't have a long-term impact the relationship, should be a goal of negotiations.
  
• There is no substitute for face-to-face negotiations.  Listen to this quote from Hank Steinbrenner:  "The meeting was a final get-together.  He wanted to make sure myself and my brother knew that he was sincere and serious."  In this day of e-mail and even cell phone calls, sometimes a short face-to-face meeting is all it may take to finalize a tricky deal.  Thus, when you're in litigation, take advantage of court-ordered mediations; you never know what can happen when the parties have to talk to each other.
  
• Consider talking directly to the opposing party.  Where there are lawyers involved, there is a tendency to let lawyers handle all the negotiations.  While that may be appropriate in many cases, it can also be a mistake in some instances. Some attorneys resort to the advocacy role too much, leaving hurt feelings and obstinence on the other side.  Having the parties talk directly with each other can resolve some of those feelings.
  
• Never be afraid to change your mind.  Parties tend to make absolute statements in negotiations. "This is my absolute final number" or, as here, "If you opt-out, we're not negotiating with you."  Hank Steinbrenner and the Yankees were wise enough to know that when A-Rod came to them looking for a deal that was within range of what the Yankees were willing to offer, he threw out his hard-line position.  Why? Because ultimately, he realized he could get what he wanted to begin with -- even if he had to go back on his original statement.   For parties negotiating difficult matters, never lose sight of what your ultimate goal is; when it's within reach, do what it takes to get there, even if it means overruling yourself once in a while.
  
• Don't be bullied.  This lesson is courtesy of The Word. 

Steinbrenner said no to baseball’s biggest star and held his ground. You have to do that sometimes, even with your stars.

There are very few people in this world who cannot be replaced in a company or an organization.  If those people try to hold a company hostage with claims of a "better deal" elsewhere, know what the market price is. If your compensation package is fair, hold your ground. You may not keep every A-Rod in your company who makes a threat to leave for more money, but you'll also earn the respect of other employees who know that the company won't be bullied by anyone. 

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

In Connecticut, the loyalties between the Red Sox and Yankees are about evenly split.   So, for now, it's baseball nirvana here in the state.   If both win their divisional series, there will be many late nights here in Connecticut watching a Yankees-Red Sox matchup.

In honor of the baseball playoffs beginning this week, I thought I would pass along some materials regarding the employment contracts of some baseball players.  And where would I turn for such information? 

It turns out the Baseball Hall of Fame has a whole website discussing the Labor History of Baseball.   Its a fascinating site that outlines a whole educational program that high schools or colleges can run about baseball's labor history, complete with profiles and source documents.  I'm certain that if my school had such a course, I would've been the first to sign up.  (Ithaca College -- near the Hall of Fame -- has run such a course over the years.)

Hidden on that site are some nuggets: the actual employment contracts of some baseball players.  Given my love of the Yankees, I thought I would post a few: Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio and portions of Derek Jeter's. 

As you will see, these are not your "standard" employment contracts.  After all, how many contracts do you know that have a limitation on the athlete playing impromptu billiards or darts?

Of course, the labor history of baseball is much more than just about the contracts.  Cases such as the Curt Flood litigation regarding free agency have set precedent for employment of athletes in all of sports. And there are even arbitration procedures for companies set up to follow "baseball arbitration" or "night baseball arbitration". 

As you watch the playoff games this month, the Baseball Hall of Fame's website is nice compliment to that experience.  And you can thank baseball for its involvement in setting precedent in the employment law arena

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)