Coaches outmaneuver NFL's defenses with court ruling on arbitration

"The NFL's practice of forcing coaches' employment disputes into closed-door arbitration could be heading for a shakeup after recent court decisions deeming the league's rules unenforceable. Two separate courts have ruled in favor of coaches' challenges to NFL arbitration requirements, with one panel labeling the league's arbitration process "unconscionable" and another calling it "unworthy even of the name of arbitration.""

"Court proceedings typically involve discovery and a greater chance of the league's internal documents and communications becoming publicly available. Last month, the Nevada Supreme Court called the arbitration clause inherently unfair and, as a result, unenforceable in former Raiders head coach Jon Gruden's case against the league and Goodell."

Two recent court rulings found portions of the NFL's mandatory arbitration framework unenforceable in their jurisdictions, characterizing the commissioner-led process as unconscionable and improperly labeled arbitration. The arbitration clause grants the commissioner final authority over employment disputes, even when he is a defendant. Nevada's decision arose in Jon Gruden's challenge and the Second Circuit's ruling allowed Brian Flores to pursue hiring-discrimination claims in court. Court litigation permits discovery and greater public access to internal league documents. The rulings are jurisdictionally limited but could prompt further legal challenges and alter league-employee power dynamics.

Read at ESPN.com