mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
Or you could just not go to a WWE show instead. 
A lot of what he said that can be generalized to any WWE wrestler (or any wrestler period) seems to center around the "independent contractor" vs "employee" issue that WWE has been exploiting for decades now. A few wrestlers (Raven, Kanyon, and ???, I think?) tried to file a suit against WWE years ago, but it was tossed out because it did not apply retroactively. An on-contract WWE wrestler could easily have their day in court contesting the validity of their contract and/or whether or not the WWE practice is legal (i.e., true independent contractors should have a lot more leverage in where and when they work outside of WWE, while employees would require benefits packages).
I'm curious why Punk, who in the episode often talked about doing things "for the boys", decided against it. I'm not judging him either way, but just curious.
A lot of what he said that can be generalized to any WWE wrestler (or any wrestler period) seems to center around the "independent contractor" vs "employee" issue that WWE has been exploiting for decades now. A few wrestlers (Raven, Kanyon, and ???, I think?) tried to file a suit against WWE years ago, but it was tossed out because it did not apply retroactively. An on-contract WWE wrestler could easily have their day in court contesting the validity of their contract and/or whether or not the WWE practice is legal (i.e., true independent contractors should have a lot more leverage in where and when they work outside of WWE, while employees would require benefits packages).
I'm curious why Punk, who in the episode often talked about doing things "for the boys", decided against it. I'm not judging him either way, but just curious.