NFLPA lawyer sues union leaders, alleging retaliation for helping FBI

A federal lawsuit filed Thursday alleges that NFL Players Association executives conspired to prevent an attorney for the union from serving as a witness in a criminal investigation probing the union’s financial activities.

The lawsuit from Heather McPhee, who has worked as an associate general counsel for the NFLPA since 2009, is the latest offshoot from an ongoing FBI investigation into potential misconduct by pro sports union leaders, including former NFLPA executive director Lloyd Howell Jr. and current MLB Players Association executive director Tony Clark.

In the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., McPhee alleges that numerous executives who were allegedly involved in illegal activities retaliated against her for agreeing to be a witness for the Department of Justice.

In her lawsuit, McPhee said NFLPA officials forced her to take leave in August due to her “workplace behavior.” Tom DePaso, the union’s former head counsel, at one point characterized such behavior as “making trouble” and being “too intense and emotional,” according to the lawsuit. Those comments and her subsequent punishment were a form of discrimination based on her sex, and were meant to intimidate her, McPhee alleged.

In a statement to The Athletic Thursday night, an NFLPA spokesperson said, “We are reviewing the complaint. Due to the pending litigation, we have no further comment at this time.”

At the center of McPhee’s case is an incentive plan that would have paid out millions of dollars to senior union leaders, including Howell and Clark. Her lawsuit alleges that the initiative was intended to enrich those executives rather than fulfill their fiduciary responsibility to the members of their unions.

According to the lawsuit, McPhee began raising legal concerns in November 2024, internally alerting NFLPA leaders about issues she saw with the creation of the bonus system and who would receive money from it.

McPhee, who said she agreed to work with the DOJ in May of this year and notified her bosses of that by the end of the month, alleges that her complaints initiated a campaign to prevent her from testifying.

Under the system McPhee questioned, named the Senior Executive Incentive Plan (SEIP), “profit units” that could be exchanged for cash would go directly to the individual unions behind OneTeam Partners, a company co-owned by the NFLPA, MLBPA and several other sports unions that secures media deals and leverages players’ name, image and licensing rights.

One of the legal pitfalls in that plan, according to McPhee, is that union representatives are legally not allowed to accept anything valuable from an employer that may influence their decisions. Directly paying those board representatives with SEIP bonuses, McPhee said, would break the law.

To avoid that problem, McPhee’s lawsuit said OneTeam made it so that those SEIP payouts would instead go to the unions themselves, which could then grant the money to executives. The plan included the possibility that those executives could include figures who represent the unions on OneTeam’s board.

That, McPhee alleges, would mean board members could potentially pay themselves by approving SEIP incentives. That would put their own interests in conflict with those of regular union members, whose profit units are more valuable when there are fewer payouts. She further alleges that the plan was created internally at OneTeam without any input from the unions’ attorneys.

Though no qualifying liquidation events have happened yet, OneTeam’s private credit debt is set to retire in 2027. That would create a window during which board members could cash in their units and collect much more money than regular members.

In a statement to The Athletic in June, OneTeam said it eventually abandoned the incentive plan and that no board members have benefited from the SEIP payouts. McPhee alleges the resolution approving the plan remains on the OneTeam books, however.

Separately, McPhee’s suit also alleges that the NFLPA failed to tell its members that an arbitrator found evidence that the players’ union confidentiality worked with NFL owners to limit how much guaranteed money players, particularly star quarterbacks, can negotiate into their contracts. In doing so, she said, the union leaders deprived their members of a crucial negotiating tool and hid it from them for more than six months.

The lawsuit names the NFLPA, Howell, DePaso and union executive Matthew Curtin. McPhee is seeking $10 million in damages.

Howell’s involvement in the lawsuit adds to a storm of controversy that’s built around him over the last year. The former NFLPA head resigned in July following allegations he used union money to pay for personal expenses, including multiple strip club visits. He’s also been accused of having a conflict of interest by leading the NFLPA while also being a paid, part-time consultant for a private equity firm that the NFL approved to pursue minority ownership stakes in franchises.

Clark, meanwhile, said in July that the FBI’s investigation into OneTeam and the MLBPA has not impacted his job.

— The Athletic’s Mike Jones contributed to this story.