RedJed Posted August 8, 2008 Report Posted August 8, 2008 Interesting news item that may be made into a seperate thread once news heats up on this. Buried in the WWE's 10-Q filing recently was this fascinating note: "Levy et al. On July 24, 2008, we were served with a summons from three of our former talent purporting to be on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated persons. The lawsuit alleges breach of contract and unjust enrichment arising from our treating them as independent contractors rather than employees, which the plaintiffs allege is an erroneous classification. We have not formally responded to the suit but intend to deny any liability for claims asserted against us and to defend vigorously against the suit." The Levy in question is, in fact, Scott Levy, AKA Raven. The contractual status of WWE wrestlers has been a topic of conversation seemingly forever, and it's actually amazing that it's taken this long for anyone to contest it. Depending upon who you talk to, WWE is anything from grievously at fault to a company that does just enough to get away with it. We'll have more in the next few days, but if WWE is ruled against this could have major, major financial ramifications on them. -I dont get why Raven is doing this years later, but apparently there is two others in this claim alongside him. Basically, the gist is the hypocrisy of the company having them as independant contractors, yet treating them as employees (the no-compete clauses in contracts would be an example of this probably).
cabbageboy Posted August 8, 2008 Report Posted August 8, 2008 I am glad someone did this because I have thought for years that the whole "independent contractor" thing with WWE was complete bullshit. These guys have contracts with just WWE. This isn't the territory days where someone wrestles for a few months in the WWWF, then moves on to the AWA, or goes to Crockett, etc. Right now when you sign with Vince, you can't just go and work for TNA....you are an employee of WWE only. In other words I think Raven and Co. have a real serious shot of winning this lawsuit.
Hawk 34 Posted August 8, 2008 Report Posted August 8, 2008 He's one of the best guys to do this. I'm curious to see who else is with Raven.
Celtic Guardian Posted August 8, 2008 Report Posted August 8, 2008 He's one of the best guys to do this. I'm curious to see who else is with Raven. The obvious suspicion would be guys without hope of working for either WWE or TNA again since TNA uses the same "independent contractor" construct.
Boxer Posted August 8, 2008 Report Posted August 8, 2008 Judging by who is not on WWE's good side, it can be the following: Brock Lesnar Goldberg Marc Mero Anyone else?
Hawk 34 Posted August 8, 2008 Report Posted August 8, 2008 Lesnar has bigger things going on as does Goldberg to team with Raven in a lawsuit. It's more likely to be guys who were jerked around a bunch and have a relationship with Raven. First name comes to my mind is Kanyon.
Celtic Guardian Posted August 8, 2008 Report Posted August 8, 2008 Judging by who is not on WWE's good side, it can be the following: Brock Lesnar Goldberg Marc Mero Anyone else? When in doubt about such things, I always gravitate to Konnan. He's outside of the U.S. wrestling system now and has already shown a willingness to challenge it.
Thanks for the Fish Posted August 8, 2008 Report Posted August 8, 2008 This could be really big, industry transforming even - back pay, health insurance, pensions, sick days and vacation time. I hope he wins.
Mike wanna be Posted August 8, 2008 Report Posted August 8, 2008 Lesnar might be involved due to the junk he went through with his no-compete, but he's not actively going to be doing anything besides putting his name on it, all things considered.
Noah Fentz Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 Contractually, they are independent contractors that signed a contract of exclusivity. I don't think they have a chance. Although, I must say, it would be nice to see the workers receive more benefits, especially health and compensation for the injured.
bob_barron Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 The fact that WWE doesn't provide health insurance is awful
Noah Fentz Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 The fact that WWE doesn't provide health insurance is awful Agreed. How can a company expect "employees" to go out and risk their career and life without it? Of course, on the flip side...could you imagine the PREMIUMS?!!
Prophet of Mike Zagurski Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 It could also be the Sandman since he was released or Sabu. I was thinking about ECW alumni. It will be interesting to see what the outcome is.
sivy Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 i was thinking sandman. since he has ties with raven. plus wasn't the sandman involved in a lawsuit while in the wwe.
IWD Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 He's one of the best guys to do this. I'm curious to see who else is with Raven. I agree. Raven comes across as more coherent and intelligent than many wrestlers, and is capable of backing up his argument through constructive and rational argument. What's the status with TNA contracts? Are TNA wrestlers treated as independent contractors too? If not, there's a chance Booker T. could be involved in the lawsuit. Essentially, the people in the lawsuit are likely to be people who are never planning to WWE and are late in their careers. (Raven & Booker are both 43, for example.) Cheers.
DarKnight Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 I hope these guys win. I remember last year, hearing about WWE considering their workers to be "independent contractors", and I couldn't believe they would say such a thing about their workers, considering that if your not allowed to work anywhere else, you are an employee. I'm surprised this lawsuit hasn't happened before, since WWE has basically lied to every one of their workers.
Atticus Chaos Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 The fact that WWE doesn't provide health insurance is awful Agreed. How can a company expect "employees" to go out and risk their career and life without it? Of course, on the flip side...could you imagine the PREMIUMS?!! In fairness, I remember reading an interview back with Jerry Lynn in 2002, when he said WWE had paid for his surgery when he was with them. I don't know if that's a common occurance, but I think there are times they will pay. I doubt they'd insult the main eventers by getting them to pay the tab. I also think they cover the women's cosmetic surgery.
Perfxion Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 I believe, almost all surgeries that happen while under contract, or directly relating to something at a WWE event, they pay for. IE: Everyone seeing Dr. James Andrews for all surgeries(maybe they get a group discount?) down in Alabama. And anything that happens while at a WWE event the WWE must cover(rules of local and state athletic commissions). But if someone has the sniffles and need to see a doc, that is out of their own pocket.
2GOLD Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 He's one of the best guys to do this. I'm curious to see who else is with Raven. I agree. Raven comes across as more coherent and intelligent than many wrestlers, and is capable of backing up his argument through constructive and rational argument. What's the status with TNA contracts? Are TNA wrestlers treated as independent contractors too? If not, there's a chance Booker T. could be involved in the lawsuit. Essentially, the people in the lawsuit are likely to be people who are never planning to WWE and are late in their careers. (Raven & Booker are both 43, for example.) Cheers. TNA might be able to get away with it though. Aren't their guys still allowed to work indy bookings or has that changed recently? The WWE doesn't exactly allow Val Venis to go work Ring of Honor if he needs the extra cash. I'm not sure but TNA might be able to skate by on it since their guys are working multiple places besides TNA. What might nail them is they get a cut and approval but I don't know, they seem closer to the independent contractor line than the E is.
Karc Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 I believe, almost all surgeries that happen while under contract, or directly relating to something at a WWE event, they pay for. IE: Everyone seeing Dr. James Andrews for all surgeries(maybe they get a group discount?) down in Alabama. And anything that happens while at a WWE event the WWE must cover(rules of local and state athletic commissions). But if someone has the sniffles and need to see a doc, that is out of their own pocket. I might be wrong, but I though WWE considered itself as an entertainment entity and not a sport, which would make them exempt from a state AC. Because then they would have to test the wrestlers for things that are not covered in the "wellness" policy, which almost every one of them would fail.
Noah Fentz Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 I believe, almost all surgeries that happen while under contract, or directly relating to something at a WWE event, they pay for. IE: Everyone seeing Dr. James Andrews for all surgeries(maybe they get a group discount?) down in Alabama. And anything that happens while at a WWE event the WWE must cover(rules of local and state athletic commissions). But if someone has the sniffles and need to see a doc, that is out of their own pocket. I might be wrong, but I though WWE considered itself as an entertainment entity and not a sport, which would make them exempt from a state AC. Because then they would have to test the wrestlers for things that are not covered in the "wellness" policy, which almost every one of them would fail. Yes, that is correct. Back in the 80's, Vince was faced with the decision of breaking kayfabe or complying with State Athletic Comm. guidelines. Of course, he chose the former, and wrestling became "sports entertainment." Again, though, I have to stress the most important part of this issue. They ARE independent contractors, but they signed a contract of EXCLUSIVITY. Therefore, they made the decision to not perform elsewhere voluntarily. I suspect there is a portion of this suit that deals with merchandising/use of imagery after a contract is terminated, much like Jesse Ventura's suit from '95 vs. Titan Sports.
RedJed Posted August 9, 2008 Author Report Posted August 9, 2008 I believe, almost all surgeries that happen while under contract, or directly relating to something at a WWE event, they pay for. IE: Everyone seeing Dr. James Andrews for all surgeries(maybe they get a group discount?) down in Alabama. And anything that happens while at a WWE event the WWE must cover(rules of local and state athletic commissions). But if someone has the sniffles and need to see a doc, that is out of their own pocket. I might be wrong, but I though WWE considered itself as an entertainment entity and not a sport, which would make them exempt from a state AC. Because then they would have to test the wrestlers for things that are not covered in the "wellness" policy, which almost every one of them would fail. Again, though, I have to stress the most important part of this issue. They ARE independent contractors, but they signed a contract of EXCLUSIVITY. Therefore, they made the decision to not perform elsewhere voluntarily. That bullshit though, because if they didnt sign the contract of exclusivity, they wouldn't even be hired.
TheFranchise Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 I believe, almost all surgeries that happen while under contract, or directly relating to something at a WWE event, they pay for. IE: Everyone seeing Dr. James Andrews for all surgeries(maybe they get a group discount?) down in Alabama. And anything that happens while at a WWE event the WWE must cover(rules of local and state athletic commissions). But if someone has the sniffles and need to see a doc, that is out of their own pocket. I might be wrong, but I though WWE considered itself as an entertainment entity and not a sport, which would make them exempt from a state AC. Because then they would have to test the wrestlers for things that are not covered in the "wellness" policy, which almost every one of them would fail. Again, though, I have to stress the most important part of this issue. They ARE independent contractors, but they signed a contract of EXCLUSIVITY. Therefore, they made the decision to not perform elsewhere voluntarily. That bullshit though, because if they didnt sign the contract of exclusivity, they wouldn't even be hired. So what? WWE isn't the only place in North America for a wrestler to work. Further more, they have the _choice_ to sign the contract knowing they can't work elsewhere if they do, it's not like it is sprung on them halfway through their contract. It's like the place I work at, they have, _have_, to work weekends as part of every contract. Everybody does. They know what conditions they'll have to work under. The fact they know what they're getting themselves in for should be enough for that to not count as a reason. Again, though, I have to stress the most important part of this issue. They ARE independent contractors, but they signed a contract of EXCLUSIVITY. Therefore, they made the decision to not perform elsewhere voluntarily.
bob_barron Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 So what? WWE isn't the only place in North America for a wrestler to work. Further more, they have the _choice_ to sign the contract knowing they can't work elsewhere if they do, it's not like it is sprung on them halfway through their contract. It's like the place I work at, they have, _have_, to work weekends as part of every contract. Everybody does. They know what conditions they'll have to work under. The fact they know what they're getting themselves in for should be enough for that to not count as a reason. Again, though, I have to stress the most important part of this issue. They ARE independent contractors, but they signed a contract of EXCLUSIVITY. Therefore, they made the decision to not perform elsewhere voluntarily. That's_not_how_the_law_works_though. Seriously, how do people type like that? It makes me want to punch them in the face. It's been well known for years that WWE's indepedent contractor stuff is a farce, they've just never been called on it. Again, this is a billion dollar worldwide brand that does not provide health insurance or cover expenses for its employees.
TheFranchise Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 I type words _like_ _this_ just to make them stand out, I dont like shouting or things of that nature. Sorry if that pissed you off.. & no, i'm no expert on how the law works, I just assume (sorry, so had to resist the urge to do it with that word) that if you knowingly sign a contract, then you know what you're getting into and you stick to it. At least, that's the way it should be.
bob_barron Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 It's okay, I'm easily annoyed. If you draw up an absurd contract and someone signs it, it can still be disputed and thrown out
TheFranchise Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 I know it can be disputed, the job I had before this, I was a manager and people were always trying to pull or claim things. I guess i'm an idealist, I just think a man should be as good as his word, and a signed contract is a man's word.
bob_barron Posted August 9, 2008 Report Posted August 9, 2008 But don't you think a company like WWE should provide better for its employees?
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now