Football players sue over head injuries!

JPINFV

Gadfly
12,681
197
63
Yes lets remove a multi billion dollar entity from any responsibility, pass on the long term care, medical bills and disability to the taxpayer.



Yes, lets remove millionaire individuals from any personal responsibility and blame the employer for the employees failure to both do due diligence and responsibility to take care of themselves.
 

CAOX3

Forum Deputy Chief
1,366
4
0
Yes, lets remove millionaire individuals from any personal responsibility and blame the employer for the employees failure to both do due diligence and responsibility to take care of themselves.

They were informed by educated medical staff employed by NFL teams they were fine to return, they werent that constitutes negligence

If that happened in any other profession we wouldnt stand for it but because their considered over paid by some their work related injuries are dismissed, seen as wimpy, or they should have known better.

The law is the law no matter how many zeros are on your paycheck.
 

JPINFV

Gadfly
12,681
197
63
Except the players are also culpable for hiding their neurological state from the training and coaching staff. No play, no dinero.

Except repeated head injuries are kinda of an obvious thing.

Except you're bringing dollars into it too. After all, why point out that it's a business worth billions of dollars if money didn't matter?

Except some injuries are "you should have known better" and that has nothing to do with that specific profession. It's like saying that an ambulance driver should have to be told to clear intersections instead of running red lights at 40 MPH, and failure to do so absolves the driver of any liability.

There is no victims here. Only willful participants.
 

CAOX3

Forum Deputy Chief
1,366
4
0
NFL players are compensated even if injured.

Yes I agree some players didnt fully disclose the extent of their injuries, but what about the players who were pressured to return by medical staff, coaches and owners? The NFL has a well documented history of this behavior and one that will be brought to light during this court case.

If any other industry didnt fully disclose or hid the risks involved with the aspects of their profession we would crucify them.

The employer is responsible for workplace safety, not the employee.

We are all aware that responding to calls increases are chances of injury, is the employer now not respionsible if we are injured in the process?

If we find out ten years down the road that constant siren use causes hearing loss, is the employer not responsible for those injuries?

I know my job is dangerous at times, so does my employer.

I am a wilful participant, being that in no way removes the liability from my employer.
 

JPINFV

Gadfly
12,681
197
63
NFL players are compensated even if injured.

Yes I agree some players didnt fully disclose the extent of their injuries, but what about the players who were pressured to return by medical staff, coaches and owners? The NFL has a well documented history of this behavior and one that will be brought to light during this court case.

So employees aren't able to just say no?
If any other industry didnt fully disclose or hid the risks involved with the aspects of their profession we would crucify them.

Ironic considering that the industry this forum revolves around routinely engages in high risk decisions that bears little to no benefits.

The employer is responsible for workplace safety, not the employee.
The employee does not get to play blissfully ignorant either, and any football player that leads with their head is solely at fault for their own long term injuries.

We are all aware that responding to calls increases are chances of injury, is the employer now not respionsible if we are injured in the process?
If I drive like an idiot, yes, the employer should not be responsible for my driving like an idiot. The vast majority of EMS accidents are, in the end, the result of drivers (including the ambulance driver) not engaging in defensive driving. Furthermore, I resent the implication that, in a supposed profession, the EMS crew bears no responsibility or liability for their own actions.

If we find out ten years down the road that constant siren use causes hearing loss, is the employer not responsible for those injuries?

Depends. If there's no evidence for the majority of that time, then no. If safety devices are provided and not used, then no.

I am a wilful participant, being that in no way removes the liability from my employer.
...it also doesn't absolve you from liability for their own actions nor personal responsibility.
 

Tigger

Dodges Pucks
Community Leader
7,854
2,808
113
They were informed by educated medical staff employed by NFL teams they were fine to return, they werent that constitutes negligence.

Not only that, but the NFL willfully suppressed information that showed that their concussion management programs were very flawed. While each team runs their own medical staff, they still receive a significant degree of guidance from the NFL's own medical staff. The information on concussions that the NFL gave to individual's teams was not only inaccurate, but many of the doctors that created the NFLs concussion management policy knew that it was inaccurate and still passed it along. Surely know one can argue that the player's should have had a better understanding of concussions than the doctors that were paid to understand it and provide recommendations to a lower provider.
 

usalsfyre

You have my stapler
4,319
108
63
If we find out ten years down the road that constant siren use causes hearing loss, is the employer not responsible for those injuries?
Too late, it's already been tried

http://my.firefighternation.com/for...ettles-siren?commentId=889755:Comment:5031890.
If you'll notice in the later part of the article, most of the claims had been dismissed.

The employer should be responsible for known risk of employment. If something is discovered 10 years down the road, it's not really fair to hold the employer responsible for protecting against something they didn't know about is it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JPINFV

Gadfly
12,681
197
63
The employer should be responsible for known risk of employment. If something is discovered 10 years down the road, it's not really fair to hold the employer responsible for protecting against something they didn't know about is it?

Heresy! Long live the proletariat! Everything bad is the fault of the evil, thieving bourgeoisie!
 
Top