Former Browns player files huge lawsuit against another NFL team
The Kansas City Chiefs are being sued by one of their former workers. Disgruntled ex-employees are nothing new, but this situation goes pretty deep.
Ramzee Robinson was the Chiefs' Director of Player Engagement, a position responsible for supporting players' well-being and development both on and off the field. Robinson is a former NFL player himself having played cornerback for the Detroit Lions, Philadelphia Eagles, Cleveland Browns, Washington Redskins, and Denver Broncos. He then finished out his playing career for two seasons in the CFL with the Saskatchewan Roughriders.
Advertisement
In the 2007 NFL draft, Robinson was named Mr. Irrelevant as he was the final pick by the Lions.
Robinson is suing the Chiefs for wrongful termination, filing this week in an 11-page complaint in the United States Court for the Western District of Missouri - Western Division. The core of the lawsuit claims racial discrimination.
RELATED: COMPLETE COMPLAINT ROBINSON V CHIEFS
According to Robinson's complaint, there are several issues. He was let go this past February, six days after the Super Bowl loss.
For one, he is stating that black employees of the Chiefs are paid less than their white counterparts. Secondly, there is a videotape that accuses Robinson of acts against a female office worker, and the Chiefs fired him without allowing him to see the video evidence. Another claim is that another NFL team, the Houston Texans, wanted to interview him for an open position, but the Chiefs halted that process.
CB Ramzee Robinson
The lawsuit is seeking an unspecified number of damages, but the docket includes a demand for $5 million. In a nutshell, Robinson is suing for racial discrimination, team retaliation, and tortious interference with business expectancy in regards to the interference with the Texans' interview.
Advertisement
In regard to the claim that black employees are passed over or paid less, the suit gives an example of a black female employee who was paid $50,000 a year and was refused a promotion. After she resigned, a white female, Melissa Weinsz, who is a Ph.D., replaced her at a rate of $80,000 a year.
When asked for a comment on the suit by Pro Football Talk, Chiefs V.P. of football communications Brad Gee stated what is pretty much a standard response in these situations:
'We can't comment because it's an active legal matter. But to be clear, the Chiefs do not tolerate discrimination of any kind. We look forward to the facts of this case coming to light.'
Robinson entered the league in Round 7, after playing cornerback at Alabama with 50 games played. He graduated with a degree in business management. After his pro career ended, he earned a master's degree in professional counseling from Webster University. He is currently a doctoral candidate at The Chicago School in Applied Behavior Analysis.
Cleveland Browns v Philadelphia Eagles
After two seasons with Detroit, he signed a one-year deal with the Eagles but was released towards the end of the 2009 season after playing three games. The Browns claimed him off waivers. Robinson played in four contests and was inactive for another while with Cleveland. He had five total tackles, all on special teams. He then spent time with Washington, Denver, and Saskatchewan.
Advertisement
Robinson's complaint states that he was fired by Kansas City for 'conduct detrimental to the league.'
He was employed for nine years with the Chiefs, which began at a salary of $35,000 and grew to $125,000 a year. But in the suit, it alleges that he was underpaid in his profession in comparison to other NFL clubs with the same job title, with salaries around $171,000. When asked for a review, Robinson states the team declined.
Robinson's attorney, Katrina Y. Robertson, issued this statement to the press:
'My client dedicated years of professional service to the Chiefs organization and supported players through critical personal and professional challenges. This lawsuit seeks to hold the organization accountable for the systemic inequities and retaliation he faced for simply demanding fairness.'
According to the Chiefs, the video is at the heart of this matter.
Apparently, the security cameras picked up Robinson attacking Weinsz. This will ultimately become the key piece of evidence in the case. The Chiefs are claiming that Robinson is dangerous and has acted inappropriately around white female co-workers.
Advertisement
In the lawsuit, Robinson, age 41, is demanding a jury trial.
The termination began when Robinson's supervisor, Kirsten Krug, accused him of attacking a 'white female coworker' after seeing the security footage. The woman was Weinsz. After the Super Bowl, Krug went into Robinson's office and accused him of the attack. When asked to review the video, Krug and the Chiefs refused.
The Chief of Security was summoned, Robinson's employment was terminated, and Krug confiscated his laptop.
Attorney Robertson stated:
'(Robinson) unequivocally denies having been in an altercation with anyone.'
The lawsuit goes on to say that Robinson's firing was a direct result of his race.
When the Texans were asked about Robinson and his accusatory issues, the team declined to comment.
Advertisement
The relevant language in the complaint appears in paragraph 24:
'Some months before his termination, Mark Donovan pressured Plaintiff to renew his contract and claimed that the contract would offer him stability. After Plaintiff signed, the Houston Texans asked KC Chiefs' management to interview Plaintiff. The KC Chiefs refused. The KC Chiefs told the Texans that an interview would violate his contract. Plaintiff discovered this information when a representative from the Texans called him personally and asked him about this missed opportunity.'
Regarding this portion of the complaint, the NFL's Anti-Tampering Policy covers this situation.
2025 NFL Draft - Previews
The Chiefs had every right under the policy to refuse to allow Robinson to interview with Houston because they weren't offering him a high-level position, and it is considered to be a lateral move. In fact, the very essence of Robinson mentioning the Texans may work against him. The fact that he states the Texans 'called him personally and asked him about this missed opportunity' just may become a violation of the Anti-Tampering policy.
Houston may also be in violation if this rings true. Teams cannot reach out to employees of other teams without permission or if those employees have expired contracts. In the end, the Texans just might become involved in a tampering investigation by the NFL.
Advertisement
More from dawgsbynature.com:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How to watch Liberty at Storm: Breanna Stewart returns to Seattle in heavyweight clash
Breanna Stewart returns to Seattle with the defending WNBA champions in tow. It's not her first time back at Climate Pledge Arena, but the hardwood still hums with memory. She won two titles here. And when she glides into open space, the court meets her like it remembers. Will Sunday's clash with the Storm end up another happy memory for Stewart? Or will Seattle play spoiler, as it has already this season? How to watch New York Liberty at Seattle Storm Venue: Climate Pledge Arena — Seattle Advertisement Time: 7 p.m. ET, Sunday TV: NBA TV (national), KOMO 4 and WWOR-My 9 (in market) Streaming: Fubo (try for free) Watching in person? Get tickets on StubHub. The Liberty, now 10-2 after a midweek stumble against the Phoenix Mercury, remain elite on offense and defense, ranking first in scoring and second in points allowed heading into the weekend. Following their second loss in three games, though, this is a recalibration game for a team still chasing its ceiling. New York averages 89.1 points per game, and Stewart remains the anchor with a team-high 21.1 points. Sabrina Ionescu is right behind her at 20.4 points per game and is riding a scoring surge, with back-to-back 34-point performances on June 14 and 17. Advertisement There's also Natasha Cloud, brought in to replace Courtney Vandersloot. The veteran guard quietly ranks among the league's top facilitators with 6.3 assists. Former WNBA MVP Jonquel Jones will be out at least a month after aggravating an ankle injury against the Mercury. While she's sidelined, expect Nyara Sabally to see extended run as the team's fifth starter. Meanwhile, Seattle enters at third place in the Western Conference, with Skylar Diggins and Nneka Ogwumike leading the way. Both average over 17 points and spearhead an offense that shares the ball well, thrives in transition and scores at an incredibly efficient rate. Gabby Williams, who set a franchise record with eight steals earlier this week, is also averaging a career-high mark in points per game (14.4). She left early in the Storm's lopsided win over the Los Angeles Sparks after turning an ankle, but she came up huge in a win against the Las Vegas Aces on Friday night with 18 points and 12 boards — the first double-double of her career. Elsewhere on defense, Ezi Magbegor continues to protect the paint with 2.1 blocks per game. If the Liberty set the rhythm and control their spacing, they'll likely be on pace for a big win on the road. However, if Seattle turns defense into offense, it could go down to the wire. Advertisement Prediction? Liberty by five. Stewart steadies, Cloud closes and New York sharpens its edge. The Athletic This article originally appeared in The Athletic. New York Liberty, Seattle Storm, WNBA, Sports Betting, Fubo Partnership 2025 The Athletic Media Company
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How to watch Fever at Aces: Caitlin Clark, Indiana face big test in Las Vegas
Sunday's WNBA slate promises one of the most intriguing matchups of the season. The Indiana Fever, led by second-year phenom Caitlin Clark, will take on A'ja Wilson and the Las Vegas Aces, winners of two of the last three WNBA championships. Las Vegas swept the four-game season series in 2024, but the circumstances couldn't be any more different as these squads head for their first highly anticipated showdown of the 2025 campaign. How to watch Indiana Fever at Las Vegas Aces Venue: T-Mobile Arena — Las Vegas Advertisement Time: 3 p.m. ET, Sunday TV: ESPN Streaming: Fubo (try for free) Watching in person? Get tickets on StubHub. With a rebuilt roster and a new head coach on the sidelines, the Fever appear to be a legitimate title contender. Despite a 6-6 record (4-3 when Clark plays), Indiana has the third-best odds to win the WNBA Finals on BetMGM — trailing only the reigning champions, the New York Liberty, and last year's runner-up, the Minnesota Lynx. Clark has followed up her historic rookie season by averaging 19.9 points, 5.7 rebounds and 8.7 assists while shooting 41.7 percent from the field and 35.5 percent from 3-point range. She's already recorded a triple-double and dropped 32 points, eight rebounds and nine assists in her return from a hamstring injury to knock off the Liberty, handing the defending champs their first loss of the season following a 9-0 start. Advertisement The Fever are still putting the pieces together, but they've already clinched a spot in the 2025 Commissioner's Cup final, which has regularly been a predictor of postseason success. In 2023 and 2024, the teams that made the Cup final also went on to meet in the WNBA Finals. On the other hand, the Aces (5-7) have gotten off to their worst start since Wilson's rookie season in 2018. Wilson missed a few games due to concussion protocol, but the issues run deeper. Once virtually unbeatable, Las Vegas now ranks in the bottom half of the league in offensive and defensive rating and has already endured multiple 20-point losses. Six-time All-Star Jewell Loyd (11.5 points per game) has also struggled to get acclimated. Even still, Wilson has played transcendent basketball. The three-time MVP and two-time Defensive Player of the Year leads the Aces in points, rebounds, blocks steals per game, highlighting her immense importance to this team. Wilson, who sustained a concussion against the Los Angeles Sparks on June 11, returned to the lineup in Friday's loss to the Seattle Storm. She put up 20 points and a team-high 14 rebounds. Advertisement The Aces and Fever will face off two more times after Sunday. Indiana hosts Las Vegas on July 3 and 24. The Athletic This article originally appeared in The Athletic. Indiana Fever, Las Vegas Aces, WNBA, Sports Betting, Fubo Partnership 2025 The Athletic Media Company
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The board decision that sent the MLB, NFL unions into controversy
Last June, eight members of the board of directors for a licensing group called OneTeam Partners, which is co-owned by the players unions for five major sports leagues, signed a resolution that would have included the member unions in a plan to receive 'profits units.' Those units, like traditional equity, could be turned into cash if the company did well. It was a move that raised alarms within at least one of the unions. Advertisement By late 2024, an official at the National Football League Players Association had repeatedly raised concerns that implementing the plan could mean that labor officials serving on OneTeam's board of directors — including the head of the NFL players union, Lloyd Howell Jr., and the leader of the Major League Baseball players union, Tony Clark — were attempting to make a change that could lead to their own financial gain, potentially at the expense of union members. The resolution, which was obtained by The Athletic, called for any eventual payouts — made through what is known as a senior employee incentive plan (SEIP) — to go to the unions the board members hail from. The resolution also directly acknowledged the possibility that the unions could then grant that money to their board members. 'The explicit goal throughout the process was to financially enrich the individuals who serve on the OTP Board as labor organization representatives,' the NFLPA official wrote to lawyers in a communication criticizing the plan, which was reviewed by The Athletic. '… the idea was to pay the money into the unions, then the individuals.' In a statement to The Athletic, OneTeam said that though the plan was considered, it was ultimately abandoned. Advertisement 'In early 2024, OneTeam initiated an exploratory review to determine whether the company could lawfully offer incentive-based compensation to current and prospective Board members,' OneTeam Partners said. 'This exploratory effort was part of a broader initiative to assess strategies for attracting high-caliber, independent talent. 'Following the legal advice of a labor law expert, it was determined that the best practice, if implemented, was to make grants to the respective players associations. In so doing, any future payments would be governed by each union's player-approved bylaws, policy, and governance frameworks. It added: 'To be unequivocally clear: no OneTeam board member, nor any union employee, was directly or indirectly granted equity in OneTeam, holds equity in OneTeam or is a participant in its SEIP and any claim to the contrary is simply misinformed and false.' Federal authorities are conducting an investigation related to OneTeam Partners and union officials. The full scope of the probe, which is being run out of the Eastern District of New York, is unclear. The Eastern District of New York declined to comment. Advertisement Five major sports unions hold stakes in OneTeam, the two largest belonging to the NFLPA and the Major League Baseball Players Association, which together own two-thirds of the company, according to people briefed on the business structure who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The NFLPA has 44 percent, the MLBPA 22 percent. The unions representing players in Major League Soccer, the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team and the Women's National Basketball Association own much smaller shares in OneTeam: 3.3 percent for MLS, .3 percent for the USWNTPA, and .2 percent for the WNBA, according to one of the people briefed on the structure. Early this month, the FBI started calling MLB and NFL players or their representatives. Prosecutor David Berman is heading the federal investigation, said people briefed on its process who were not authorized to speak publicly. With a federal investigation underway, the NFLPA has retained outside counsel separate from the outside lawyers retained by its executive director, Howell. Howell's lawyer did not reply to requests for comment. 'We're guided by our responsibility to our members in everything we do and we will continue to fully cooperate with the investigation,' the NFLPA said in a statement to The Athletic. Advertisement The MLBPA declined to comment Friday. That union too has retained outside counsel separate from its leader, Clark. His attorney did not return requests for comment. The NFLPA official who voiced concern about the incentive plan wrote that they were concerned about the potential for various conflicts of interest. The official argued internally that the change to the plan could dilute the players' existing stakes, which they held via their unions. The official also questioned whether the players were informed of how their financial interests might be affected. The NFLPA official's email with lawyers shows talk of changing OneTeam's SEIP dated to 2023, when a new CEO took over. In March 2024, OneTeam asked outside counsel whether there would be any issues granting union officials on its board participation in a SEIP, according to the same email. In response, the official wrote, the law firm flagged concerns regarding the National Labor Relations Act were any units to be granted directly to union board members. Plans like SEIP are common in the business world. Companies use them to reward and lure top leaders, and the programs often grant traditional shares in a company. Private companies in particular will often grant something that operates similarly to shares but is not traditional equity, according to Chris Crawford, managing director for the executive compensation practice at the firm Gallagher. Advertisement 'It's not a publicly traded, readily tradable environment,' Crawford said. 'It gets into these third-party transactions that get a little bit messy. The most common is by a generic term called 'phantom stock.'' Hence OneTeam's use of 'profits units.' But ultimately, OneTeam is not a common business because it is largely owned by unions. Union officials have legal obligations to their members and their members' interests, and most unions don't have for-profit arms with the overlay of those governance concerns. 'The labor organizations' representatives on the OTP Board are there as FIDUCIARIES representing their union members' direct ownership interests in the Company — their legal duties are not to the Company generally, but rather their union members' ownership in the company,' the NFLPA official wrote in the email to lawyers. Advertisement The union officials have their positions on OneTeam's board because of their union roles, positions for which they are already compensated. Howell was paid $3.6 million by the NFLPA for the 12 months from March 2024 through February 2025, according to the union's annual disclosure filed with the Department of Labor. Clark was paid $3.5 million for the 2024 calendar year, per the baseball union's filing. The NFLPA has four seats on OneTeam's board, and the MLBPA has three seats. Both Howell's and Clark's signatures appear on the resolution to change OneTeam's senior employee incentive plan. The unions representing players in MLS, the USWNT and the WNBA share one seat on the board that rotates. Only the signature of Becca Roux, the head of the USWNTPA, appears on the resolution from last year. Roux, as well as Bob Foose, head of the MLSPA, and Terri Jackson, head of the WNBPA, have hired Steve McCool of McGuireWoods as outside counsel. Advertisement 'I notified the prosecutor in New York that I represent a number of OTP board members,' McCool said by phone Friday. 'My clients have no cause for concern and they are available to answer any questions the government may have about this matter.' Outside investors own the remaining 30 percent of OneTeam that is not owned by unions. The SEIP resolution called for the NFLPA to receive 44 percent of the new plan units available to the board, and the MLBPA 33 percent. The other three unions were in line to receive 3.7 percent each. The outside investors on the board were not going to receive any new incentive units, the resolution said. Such an arrangement has the potential to create at least the appearance of a conflict of interest, according to Lee Adler, a labor lawyer with no involvement in the matter who has long worked as counsel to unions. Advertisement 'Is there something in that set of criteria for the incentive that might have some influence on how or what the union officials who sit on the board actually end up … legislating (at OneTeam)?' asked Adler, a lecturer at the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations. NFLPA employees said at a meeting in November 2024 that they expected payments via SEIP would be $200,000 to $300,000, the NFLPA official wrote in the email. Sports unions have moved aggressively to capitalize on their players' branding rights. The MLBPA and NFLPA were among the founders of OneTeam in 2019. Both unions already had for-profit arms that handled licensing business, and those arms still exist today. But they were betting that a company with aggregated rights would have greater leverage. The venture has been a boon not only for the unions but also for the private equity investors who partnered with them. RedBird Capital cashed out its 40 percent stake in 2022, when the company had a $1.9 billion valuation. The windfalls from name, image and licensing rights carry a slew of gains for athletes, including bolstering traditional labor objectives like collective bargaining. The NFLPA reported about $101 million in revenue from OneTeam from early 2024 into 2025, and the MLBPA about $45 million for 2024. But both the baseball and football unions have been wrapped up in public controversy this year over, in part, OneTeam. Advertisement Late last year, an anonymous complaint filed with the National Labor Relations Board levied allegations at Clark, including concerns over equity from OneTeam. The football union, where internal complaints had already been lodged, then brought on an outside firm, Linklaters, to conduct a review. The NFLPA has not publicized that firm's findings. But in March, in an email reviewed by , Howell notified OneTeam's board of directors that Linklaters found the NFLPA and OneTeam had been in compliance. This article originally appeared in The Athletic. NFL, MLB, MLS, WNBA, Sports Business 2025 The Athletic Media Company
