Has the owner paid out the contract, Petke would have nothing to sue about.
That would have been reasonable. I do not think that Mike was the problem with that.
Petke could have sued for wrongful termination, I would think.
BTW, the Mexican federation and lease are starting a huge campaign to eradicate the chant during goal kicks. They say that they want to stop discriminatory chants in stadiums. Games will be suspended and fans will be ejected. I believe its going to start in 3-4 weeks.
The initial claim may be that the word is neither racist or homophobic. The next, that the sanction is too great.
The bigger question will be, how long does the RSL owner want this to drag on. A civil lawsuit could take years. The legal fees on both sides could exceed the amount owed. RSL will not recoup their legal fees, but if Mike prevails, RSL could be forced to pay his. Many plaintiffs lawyers take cases on a contingency basis, which means they get a share of any settlement. Employment plaintiff lawyers can play hardball, and are willing to embarrass an employer through Discovery & depositions. If the RSL owner is a businessman, he will have to consider how much money he wants to risk. OTOH, he could have sat down with Mike and calmly worked something out. The fact that he decided not to pay Mike the balance surprises me.
Thank you for the education and detailed response. Im tracking everything you wrote.
1 thought.....maybe, for legal purposes, the RSL owner was advised to pay the balance of his salary upon termination. Due to the fact he was terminated with cause, paying the balance of the salary would have put him on shaky legal ground should Perke have filed a lawsuit.
Im sure they could have worked something out behind closed doors though.