T.O. Article on Fox: Q for attorney types

[mgadfly]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5086966

In the article the author writes:

The union tries to differentiate Johnson's case in two ways: First, they say Johnson didn't want the union to file a grievance. But the union can file a grievance even if a player doesn't want them to.

Anyone know whether this is bargained for in the NFLPA CBA with the league, or is this the default under the NLRA? I do labor arbitrations for a local union and I have a case where the (potential) grievant was fired but does not want to file a grievance. It is important to the Union that we establish that someone can not be fired for the reason this person was fired (off duty conduct). The Employer is arguing that I can't take a grievance to arbitration without the grievant and I am arguing that the right to grieve is a collective right of the Union and not an individual right.

Anyone here have any experience with this sort of thing?

[Ksyrup]

I don't have any experience with this, so I can't answer your question, but I would assume that this is either bargained for or perhaps established in case law for the very reason you need it - because a departed employee may not have an interest in the outcome of a matter that the union will have to live with.