The Don had his flaws, but he knew the difference between personal and professional.
Alex Rodriguez has done a lot of bad things, but everything he does isn’t wrong. Kudos to lawyer/baseball pundit Craig Calcaterra for flagging a typical bit of pundit idiocy.
Yesterday, the news was that Rodriguez, rather than accept his season-long suspension as a result of the arbitration panel’s final decision regarding the disciplinary action against him taken by Major League Baseball, is suing MLB, and the players union for not properly defending him. This involves allegations that the union’s late Executive Director, Michael Weiner (who perished last year of an inoperable brain tumor) failed in his duty to A-Rod, a member in good standing, though a slimy one. This, to various sportswriters, broadcasters and bloggers, was the smoking gun proof that Alex’s heart is as black as a Mamba: how dare he impugn the character of a dead man, a beloved family man who died before his time? For example, here is Yahoo Sports’ indignant Jeff Passon:
“Alex Rodriguez is a sad, desperate man, and sad, desperate men do sad, desperate things like blame their sad, desperate circumstances on a beloved, deceased man. Of the many layers of pathetic A-Rod has peeled back in trying to excuse his own wretched choices, never had he spoken ill of the dead, not until Monday when his failing defense found a new nadir.”
Rodriguez may well be a sad, desperate man as well as a certified rotter, but his treatment of Weiner is not one of his many transgressions. The law suit isn’t based on personal animus, and Weiner, a good lawyer and a fair man, would have been among the first to rank Passon’s complaint as absurd. The fact that a tumor cut short an executive’s life should not in any way handicap someone aggrieved by the negligent execution of that executive’s duties while alive, and it is neither unethical, nor crass, nor insensitive for one who believes he was so aggrieved to pursue available legal remedies.
Let’s be reasonable: Weiner, whether he’s decomposing or playing harp in a heavenly combo these days,couldn’t care less about A-Rod’s suit, and it doesn’t hurt him a bit. If he were alive, the lawsuit would have at least been annoying, but he’s not alive. It has no impact on him whatsoever. Not speaking ill of the recently deceased is a good and wise rule of civility, but it seems inarguably true that there are exceptions to this rule, and one of them is when speaking ill might save you $22,ooo,ooo and your career, which are what Rodriguez is attempting to salvage with this suit.In short, the criticism from Passon and others is a cheap shot, based on a core misconception of what professionalism is, and a foolish confusion of business and personal relationships.
This was one aspect of professional ethics that Don Corleone understood perfectly.
______________________
Sources: ESPN, NBC Sports, Yahoo!
Ethics Alarms 
And, frankly, A-Hole isn’t entirely wrong… The union is there for this sort of thing…
No, he has a legitimate argument. I’ll be shocked if he wins, but he’s not out of line.
The law of big numbers demanded that he be right about something at some point…
This is also the only way to appeal the arbitrator’s decision. This is pretty much how all appeals of arbitrations conducted under collective bargaining agreements are done under section 301 of the LMRA. A union member cannot generally sue the employer–that is the province of the union. The only time they can do it is when the allege a breach of the union’s duty of fair representation and so they are seeking to sue the employer in the union’s name. It is a hybrid action, but it is the normal way union arbitration appeals reach a court.
Thanks, Jay; an important point, which Craig also made in a subsequent post.
The other thing is that to some extent, the union did fall down on the job.
Say what you will about Ryan Braun, but when MLB fired the arbitrator for overturning his initial suspension in 2012, the union didn’t make a stink of it, and also did not insist that the Shyam Das’s opinion be published.
MLB then went on full witch-hunt mode. Commendable, but bordering on well-intentioned extremist mode there.
So, A-Rod may have a point that the union failed to protect him adequately.
“…but everything he does isn’t wrong…” I suggest rewording that as “not everything he does is wrong” or “sometimes he isn’t wrong”. Although I understood what you meant after I stopped to process it, I had to take a moment to do so. I have a visceral dislike for universal statements. It’s always bugged me as a mathematician, but I also think the inaccurate use of universal statements has contributed a great deal to the polarization of the electorate.