Fired or Contract Not Renewed?

Question

As the raging debate over the future of Joe Torre continues, there have been some out there who say... Well he isn't being fired, his contract is not being renewed. I would gather that the outcome of this event is a matter of interpretation. If someone said to me, you have been with us for 12 years now, but we have decided not to renew your contract, you will have to seek employment elsewhere, I would interpret that as being fired, or should I say being terminated, from a position? So, by those out there who debate this, no contract, contract expired, so Joe really isn't being fired, I would have to say that some of you are sugar coating it. What do the rest of you say?

Answer 1

I would have to say from a technical standpoint that if Joe was in the middle of a current contract, let's say a 5 year contract and was let go after 3 years, that to me is being fired. There would be a buy out clause for monetary compensation.

An option my ownership not to offer a new contract would not be considered being fired. I thing the words "contract renewal" is actually not correct. A contract that has run its course is a completed contract. The reality is there is no such thing as a "renewed contract". It would be considered a new contract.

If Steinbrenner decides not to offer Joe a new contract, Joe would simply be considered unemployed. I would not consider Joe as being fired.

Players go through the same thing. If they are not offered a new contract they are considered "released".

It's all about perception.

Answer 2

Not renewing your contract and getting fired always lead to the same question. . . why? Not renewing your contract can have reasons that don't always reflect poorly on the non-renewee, such as lack of funds for the position, or maybe it was only intended to be short term while a project was completed or permanent staff trained to take over and complete the job. A firing always looks bad. It generally means the fired took some action that was so wrong that employment was immediately terminated - the "at will" contract between employee and employer. Or, it means that the fired didn't perform well. Someone under contract can also be fired, but it most likely means incurring additional expense for the employer. Sometimes if benefits or bonuses are involved an employer needs to show "cause" to fire someone on contract and the burden of proof falls to them as they are trying to terminate the contract early. Often being layed off seems to be like being fired. I think when a company finds they need to cut back positions it's not always the person being cut's fault, but the seed is planted that maybe if they were worth keeping the company would have found a way. This is unfortunate, but I think employers tend to view it that way unless a company packs up and leaves town.

Answer 3

As an occasional contract worker in the IT field, if my contract ends and I am not renewed, it's not because I didn't do my job, but because I did do my job and that's the only one they had for me.

The same seems to be true for Torre (in the strictest sense), however, there is still a job to be done with that team and they will replace him. In that light, you can say he was fired (or non-renewed because of performance)

However, if some people correct those that say he was fired with the actual term, I am not sure why it's a big deal. It's all about interpretation, not really sugar coating. It's perspective.

The Yankees weren't required to enter into an employment agreement again, so it's a non-renewal.

Answer 4

Joe Torre's time in New York has come and gone, along with Bernie Williams, Jorge Posada, Mariano Rivera and quite possibly Alex Rodriguez. Brian Cashman has his work cut out for him; he has to re-sign the former greats for market value, not what the players think their value is. If Cashman lets some or all of these stars walk, we're going to see a couple things happen. Some owners will overpay the former Yankees and then watch them under perform. Meanwhile, the Yankees will outbid the rest of MLB for some big-name free agents such as Andruw Jones and/or Torii Hunter. Regardless we can close the chapter on this Yankees era.

Answer 5

If they want to "fire" Joe Torre, they better do it by October 31st. At that point, his contract will be up and it wouldnt be renewed. So, Georgie better decide soon on Torre's future. there are a few teams out there that would love his services.

Answer 6

He's not being fired. He isn't under contract, so even if they wanted to bring him back he could just as easily go elsewhere. That is the key difference to me. He has a choice to just up and leave without even waiting for them to decide on his future with the organization. If he was being fired, he wouldn't have any choice until after he was cut loose.

Answer 7

Yeah, absolutely. It's a moot point. You're fired or your contract isn't renewed...um, it's the same thing. Either way, you aren't returning and your team showed you the door.

I STILL think Torre should be back. And I think there's a chance he will be. There's always too much dramatic sh** in NY. No offense to New Yorkers, I think it's a great city but you have to agree there's too much nonsense.

Answer 8

Terminated, fired, let go, not renewed the outcome is the same. Who knows what the Yankees are going to do. Maybe Joe doesn't want to coach anymore?

Answer 9

Last week Stienbrenner said If Torre doesn't win this series with the Indians,and move on to the next round he's FIRED! So this makes me belive George would have given him a new contract if we would have won,So,for me he's Fired! Because George told the media this!

Answer 10

Corporate America always sugar coats when people get fired. In real life, your fired. And how that effects your next employment depends on the person who is fired.

Torre is probably of the very few men in pinstripes that I actually respect, and with his resume he should have no problems finding employment next season.