Chacon’s actions cost him

By Brian Hunsicker

Published: June 28, 2008

Shawn Chacon wants his money. Maybe surprisingly, maybe not, the MLB players’ union wants Chacon to get his money too.
Never mind that the soon-to-be-former Astros pitcher assaulted general manager Ed Wade. Though Chacon’s and Wade’s accounts of the incidents differ in the details, neither disputed that Chacon attacked Wade.
Chacon didn’t just cross the line, he cleared it by several feet, nearing years-old records in the process.
Houston promptly put Chacon on waivers after Wednesday’s incident. If he clears waivers on Monday, his one-year, $2 million contract will be terminated.
Chacon has fulfilled less than half of the contract, yet his agent told the Houston Chronicle they will consider filing a grievance if he clears waivers. In a separate story, players’ association general counsel Michael Weiner told the Associated Press that the union believes the Astros violated the basic agreement and it is prepared to stand by Chacon.
It seems there is no stipulation in the union’s charter that allows for common sense.
Chacon assaulted someone from his own front office. That it happened to be the general manager should be of no consequence.
If, in the disputed details, Astros owner Drayton McLane or president Tal Smith find that Wade instigated or was otherwise unprofessional in the moments leading up to Chacon’s assault, then Wade ought to be suspended. If that unprofessionalism is found to be egregious, Wade should be fired too.
But Wade has no such union to get his back.
The basic agreement that Weiner alluded to has a section dedicated to discipline; the first topic deals with just cause.
“The Parties recognize that a Player may be subjected to disciplinary action for just cause by his Club, the Vice President, On-Field Operations or the Commissioner,” the basic agreement reads. “Therefore, in Grievances involving discipline, the issue to be resolved shall be whether there has been just cause for the penalty imposed.”
Must we really go through an elementary show-and-tell to prove whether Chacon’s actions fit the punishment?
If the union insists, then what would happen to any of us if we were to throw a colleague to the floor in anger? What if we were to do the same to one of our supervisors?
The answer isn’t difficult. We’d be escorted off the property; contract or not, we’d have certainly seen the last paycheck from that employer; and we’d be lucky to get out of it without a scheduled court date.
And, not least, we’d be fired. Quickly.
If the union wants to pick out a technical provision from any of the other 241 pages of the basic agreement, it exposes itself as an out-of-touch organization that will zealously guard its territory, no matter how ludicrous the charge, no matter how plain the answer.
Chacon decided to escalate an argument into a fight. He is alone in the blame in that regard. Because of that decision, he won’t earn any of the remaining $983,607 — per the AP — left on his contract.
Still, he wants his money. How appalling.
And sadly, it’s not even the most appalling aspect to the story.
Brian Hunsicker is a staff writer for the Potomac News & Manassas Journal Messenger. Reach him at 703-878-8048 or via e-mail at .