Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
6226 replies to this topic

#5221 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,638 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 21 December 2012 - 09:00 PM

Somehow this song seems appropriate...


  • 0
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#5222 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,634 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 21 December 2012 - 09:35 PM

Remember, just because the players voted to dissolve the union. doesn't mean they're going to. This was just to give the board the power to do it.

The NHLPA is just using this to get leverage. They will likely go the NHL and say either we make a deal, or we dissolve the union, and you get served with a class action lawsuit.

But I'm pretty sure the NHL is well aware of this.
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#5223 ba;;isticsports

ba;;isticsports

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Joined: 29-January 03

Posted 21 December 2012 - 11:12 PM

Remember, just because the players voted to dissolve the union. doesn't mean they're going to. This was just to give the board the power to do it.

The NHLPA is just using this to get leverage. They will likely go the NHL and say either we make a deal, or we dissolve the union, and you get served with a class action lawsuit.

But I'm pretty sure the NHL is well aware of this.


Let them de-certify
Just let them see if that makes them any richer because of doing so !
They certainately will NOT be if everyone felt like myself
Their greed and what they have done to the sport I enjoyed, to get more money,will mean less from me !. Neither of them cares what it costs me to watch games and make it financially better for me- I am the ony one who Isn't a Multi-millionaire as well.They did not show loyalty to me,so don't expect it in return- This fighting Has nothing to do with making it more entertaining or rewarding for the fans, which without they wouldn't be making a dime of money off of without our support.

Im not excited about Hockey starting ,whenever it will decide too
The year Baseball went on strike, people were talking about how it was the Expos year to win it all had they played it

Maybe after this lockout season, it will be referred to as the Canucks last best chance to win the Stanley Cup?
That, as well as the greed from both sides being selfish and not getting something done has caused resentment.

I feel like I am being played,taken for granted, am angry.
I still Love Hockey
I just cannot see myself getting emotionally attached to the NHL and its players like I once was again
The trust has been broken
The damage has been done !
  • 2

#5224 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,634 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 21 December 2012 - 11:23 PM

Let them de-certify
Just let them see if that makes them any richer because of doing so !
They certainately will NOT be if everyone felt like myself
Their greed and what they have done to the sport I enjoyed, to get more money,will mean less from me !. Neither of them cares what it costs me to watch games and make it financially better for me- I am the ony one who Isn't a Multi-millionaire as well.They did not show loyalty to me,so don't expect it in return- This fighting Has nothing to do with making it more entertaining or rewarding for the fans, which without they wouldn't be making a dime of money off of without our support.

Im not excited about Hockey starting ,whenever it will decide too
The year Baseball went on strike, people were talking about how it was the Expos year to win it all had they played it

Maybe after this lockout season, it will be referred to as the Canucks last best chance to win the Stanley Cup?
That, as well as the greed from both sides being selfish and not getting something done has caused resentment.

I feel like I am being played,taken for granted, am angry.
I still Love Hockey
I just cannot see myself getting emotionally attached to the NHL and its players like I once was again
The trust has been broken
The damage has been done !


I feel ya man, I'm right there with you. As I'm sure lot of fans are.
  • 2

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#5225 Cromeslab

Cromeslab

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 841 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 10

Posted 21 December 2012 - 11:53 PM

Does the NHL& the NHLPA even realize how much damage they have done to their brand,yes I said it THEIR brand.These clowns have to work it out and all they seem to be doing is trying to out posture each other(see what happens when the media gets involved).Its all about passing the buck and not trying to be held accountable for the woes of the league,whereas the truth is they're both to blame,I think that this hole situation is going to cost the league more than they ever imagined and I hope that they realize this .Im seein two more teams in Canada just so the league can get through this,we're all a bunch of suckers.
  • 0
Posted Image

"Where you've been is good and gone,all you can keep is the gettin there"Townes Van Zandt

#5226 Cromeslab

Cromeslab

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 841 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 10

Posted 21 December 2012 - 11:58 PM

At least we got world junior right now,f$&k the NHL I say
  • 0
Posted Image

"Where you've been is good and gone,all you can keep is the gettin there"Townes Van Zandt

#5227 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,750 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 22 December 2012 - 12:01 AM

I just want to watch NHL hockey. That's all. I would like Center Ice for free as compensation for putting up with this crap.
  • 2

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

Posted Image
2 0 14 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#5228 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 22 December 2012 - 05:24 AM

It shouldn't be necessary to sit around jawing for all these weeks to sort out a deal. These people are incompetent. I hope there is a backlash but I can't see it. After all they got away with it last time, should we really have been surprised?

I'm past bothering now because my home town hockey team Fife Flyers are starting to make a move up the league. And guess what ..........we are doing it without the help of any of the NHL players that many of the teams above them signed. Great to see hockey treated like a sport for fans rather than a business where fans don't count.

Some time ago on here someone said to me relative to a player we were discussing "he's only in it for the money" to which I replied "aren't they all?" Now it would be naive to think that pro hockey players shouldn't look after themselves and their families to the best extent that they can but it seems to be forgotten AND to be taken for granted that none of their lifestyle would be possible without the fan loyalty and sponsorship.

I'm not just blaming the players here but it has to be said that they are closest to the fans and if that means they give something up to get a deal done then I think they should.

Edited by Bodee, 22 December 2012 - 05:26 AM.

  • 1
Kevin.jpg

#5229 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 22 December 2012 - 05:28 AM

I just want to watch NHL hockey. That's all. I would like Center Ice for free as compensation for putting up with this crap.


That actually sounds fair for putting fans through this.

NHL should do it, but never will. They care about the fans money, not the fans.
  • 0

zackass.png


#5230 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,048 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 22 December 2012 - 08:58 AM

Remember, just because the players voted to dissolve the union. doesn't mean they're going to. This was just to give the board the power to do it.

The NHLPA is just using this to get leverage. They will likely go the NHL and say either we make a deal, or we dissolve the union, and you get served with a class action lawsuit.

But I'm pretty sure the NHL is well aware of this.

When you think about it what else does the PA have left? Even if they take to the courts what will they have left after years of litigation? I am sure you are right that the NHL has already considered their options beyond the litigation process. I was surprised at the vote breakdown but I guess solidarity does that for ya. I suspect litigation will fold as many as 5 or 6 teams. 125 fewer jobs.

The decertification ploy has a shelf life up to Jan. 4th +/- ! Beyond that and total war will breakout. Trouble is the NHL has most of the weapons. Possibly Fehr draws to many comparisons between American football and baseball. The big dif IMO is that the NHL has no where near the same money on the table. It cost them less to shut it down.

There is more going on here than the uber rich owners sticking it to the poor players scenario. Ownership realizes that the 2004 deal blew up in their faces. Not only do they have to correct that but they have to consider their other partners other than the players. The financiers that build their arenas and the media companies that buy their games. Without cost certainty how do they even sell long term deals like the NBC deal? Without big media deals how does the NHL business plan have any hope of success? Sorry but NHL hockey in Winnipeg and hopefully in TO (2) and Quebec do not impress ESPN. To me this all means the NHL has a serious bottom line to these negociations. As much as Fehr is trying to shave a few more points in favour of his PA I think it will be very tough. We will all know shortly. I suspect a NHL threat to cancel the season by Jan. 2nd to force the PA's hand.

Edited by Boudrias, 22 December 2012 - 09:00 AM.

  • 0

#5231 sedated

sedated

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,727 posts
  • Joined: 08-October 05

Posted 22 December 2012 - 02:27 PM

Not sure why people are surprised by this. Fehr is notorious for doing this in every league he gets picked for. The only thing I hate about this above other things is the fact that it's only the high end earning players that are really being fought for to this degree. I sided with the owners at the start of this because I have always felt the NHLPA is being too greedy for the rich players. Fehr was always a terrible choice as well.

"With the NHL locking out the players at midnight on September 15, 2012, Fehr became the only Executive Director to be directly involved in work stoppages in two sports. Six of the eight contract negotiations he has been involved in have resulted in work stoppages, including five consecutive negotiations between the MLBPA and Major League Baseball."

The 'rich' NHL players will love him for cherry picking for their wallets. The fans and every other NHL player will probably be more along the lines of "Wtf is this?"
  • 0

#5232 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,281 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 22 December 2012 - 04:14 PM

It's not Fehr's job to give a sh*t about the fans. He's working for the players, if the players asked him to get a deal done for 48 games he would do it.

Fehr is a hired gun, and he's most likely going to move on after this negotiation.
  • 0

Subbancopy.jpg


#5233 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,314 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 22 December 2012 - 04:52 PM

Not sure why people are surprised by this. Fehr is notorious for doing this in every league he gets picked for. The only thing I hate about this above other things is the fact that it's only the high end earning players that are really being fought for to this degree. I sided with the owners at the start of this because I have always felt the NHLPA is being too greedy for the rich players. Fehr was always a terrible choice as well.

"With the NHL locking out the players at midnight on September 15, 2012, Fehr became the only Executive Director to be directly involved in work stoppages in two sports. Six of the eight contract negotiations he has been involved in have resulted in work stoppages, including five consecutive negotiations between the MLBPA and Major League Baseball."

The 'rich' NHL players will love him for cherry picking for their wallets. The fans and every other NHL player will probably be more along the lines of "Wtf is this?"

And now MLB is one of the best run setups for players and owners alike. Where's your hate for Bettman due to his multiple work stoppages? The NHLPA has never wanted to leave the negotiating table, yet the NHL has done so repeatedly, only agreeing to come back for the subsequent meeting with specific terms set in favour of them.
  • 2

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#5234 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,457 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 22 December 2012 - 05:15 PM

*
POPULAR

Not sure why people are surprised by this. Fehr is notorious for doing this in every league he gets picked for.


By "every league" I assume you mean the only 2 Fehr's been involved in, and that you're ignoring the fact that the NHL "work stoppage" is yet another owner lockout.

People like to talk a lot about the 1994/95 baseball players' strike but what they often forget to mention is the context, which even Fay Vincent, a former MLB commissioner, "blame[d] baseball's labor problems of the early 1990s, including the 1994-95 strike, on player anger at what he called the owners' theft from the players." (Source: http://en.wikipedia....eball_collusion) Given that context, it's rather silly to blame Fehr for what even a MLB commissioner clearly blames on owners' misdeeds, especially when you add in the fact that Fehr remained the MLBPA executive director until December 2009 and helped to make baseball the only sport to not have a work stoppage of any kind in the past 18 years.

And how about Bettman? Well, while Fehr was creating peace in baseball Bettman was locking out players. Again and again. In fact, he's on his third lockout in 18 years. "Under his watch, the NHL has already lost more games to labour disruptions than the three other major North American team sports combined — with no end in sight." (Source: http://www.montrealg...7739/story.html) In fact, no one invovled in sports has lost more games than Bettman. (Source: http://www.cbc.ca/sp...ey/nhl-lockout/) Now put that in the context of record revenue and sponsorship deals, most teams making money (despite shamefully low team revenue sharing in comparison to other leagues), and almost all teams being valuated at significantly higher than they were even since the last lockout.

So, to review: Fehr helped baseball achieve 18+ years of labour peace. Bettman has led the owners in 3 separate lockouts in 18 years and is cultivating negative feelings among fans and sponsors alike.

You're right, no one should be surprised by this lockout. You're just wrong about why.

Edited by poetica, 22 December 2012 - 05:16 PM.

  • 7
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#5235 Remy

Remy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,060 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08

Posted 22 December 2012 - 06:59 PM

By "every league" I assume you mean the only 2 Fehr's been involved in, and that you're ignoring the fact that the NHL "work stoppage" is yet another owner lockout.

People like to talk a lot about the 1994/95 baseball players' strike but what they often forget to mention is the context, which even Fay Vincent, a former MLB commissioner, "blame[d] baseball's labor problems of the early 1990s, including the 1994-95 strike, on player anger at what he called the owners' theft from the players." (Source: http://en.wikipedia....eball_collusion) Given that context, it's rather silly to blame Fehr for what even a MLB commissioner clearly blames on owners' misdeeds, especially when you add in the fact that Fehr remained the MLBPA executive director until December 2009 and helped to make baseball the only sport to not have a work stoppage of any kind in the past 18 years.

And how about Bettman? Well, while Fehr was creating peace in baseball Bettman was locking out players. Again and again. In fact, he's on his third lockout in 18 years. "Under his watch, the NHL has already lost more games to labour disruptions than the three other major North American team sports combined — with no end in sight." (Source: http://www.montrealg...7739/story.html) In fact, no one invovled in sports has lost more games than Bettman. (Source: http://www.cbc.ca/sp...ey/nhl-lockout/) Now put that in the context of record revenue and sponsorship deals, most teams making money (despite shamefully low team revenue sharing in comparison to other leagues), and almost all teams being valuated at significantly higher than they were even since the last lockout.

So, to review: Fehr helped baseball achieve 18+ years of labour peace. Bettman has led the owners in 3 separate lockouts in 18 years and is cultivating negative feelings among fans and sponsors alike.

You're right, no one should be surprised by this lockout. You're just wrong about why.


I really wish I could "like" this post more than once. Very well put.
  • 0

#5236 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68,211 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 23 December 2012 - 12:24 AM

@VancouverSun: Don Cherry confident NHL will return mid-Jan., compares lockout to 94-95 season http://t.co/S9Zu5yD8
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#5237 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,155 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 23 December 2012 - 12:56 AM

The stage of the lockout is so painful because the last few steps needed to get this season going are so painfully clear to see.
  • 0

zackass.png


#5238 Heretic

Heretic

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,193 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 07

Posted 23 December 2012 - 11:21 AM

So the players have voted that they can disband the union, the lockout is against the union...
This is what I would like to know...if the NHL owners vote to disband the NHL - what then? Can the players still sue? Their contract was with an NHL team - if that team dissolves, then what? Owners can file bankruptcy? Form a new league?
  • 0

McCoy: We were speculating. Is God really out there?
Kirk: Maybe he's not out there, Bones. Maybe he's right here. [points to his heart]

Posted Image


#5239 Canuck222

Canuck222

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
  • Joined: 09-November 08

Posted 23 December 2012 - 11:51 AM

So the players have voted that they can disband the union, the lockout is against the union...
This is what I would like to know...if the NHL owners vote to disband the NHL - what then? Can the players still sue? Their contract was with an NHL team - if that team dissolves, then what? Owners can file bankruptcy? Form a new league?


... :picard:
  • 1

#5240 Heretic

Heretic

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,193 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 07

Posted 23 December 2012 - 12:18 PM

... :picard:


Posted Image
  • 1

McCoy: We were speculating. Is God really out there?
Kirk: Maybe he's not out there, Bones. Maybe he's right here. [points to his heart]

Posted Image


#5241 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,314 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 23 December 2012 - 01:41 PM

So the players have voted that they can disband the union, the lockout is against the union...
This is what I would like to know...if the NHL owners vote to disband the NHL - what then? Can the players still sue? Their contract was with an NHL team - if that team dissolves, then what? Owners can file bankruptcy? Form a new league?

The facepalms are accurate, but not descriptive.

The owners can already file bankruptcy, and any attempts to form a new league would be problematic since the players and NHL owned property like team names and logos don't follow the owners. They are contracted and copyrighted by the league. I'm not as certain on the contracts with arenas and the like, as that may be owner controlled in at least some cases, but having a fancy ice rink to play on means nothing without contracts to the players and the team name/colours/logo they've come to cheer for.

For instance, Aquilini could choose to start a new team in a new league called the Vancouver Millionaires after he bought the rights to the name (assuming it was he who bought it and not the Canucks organization). He wouldn't have the rights to, or even first dibs on, any of the current players on the Canucks though - and that's what we've spent much of this thread talking about, on whether the fans are fans because of the team, or because of the players.

Either way, it would be a new team with new players (most likely not any of top NHLPA members, possibly not even large enough chunk to draw fans on that alone), so no guarantee on fanbase.
  • 0

schroedersig2_by_elvis15-d5szksn.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#5242 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,457 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 23 December 2012 - 01:59 PM

LEGAL LOOK: NHLPA HAS AUTHORITY TO DISSOLVE - WHAT'S NEXT?

The players have voted overwhelmingly - 706-22 - to give the NHLPA the power of dissolution by way of a disclaimer of interest.

We've come to a bit of a crossroads. The NHLPA must now decide what it wants to do next. There are options, but with each option comes risk.

What's the NHLPA's first option?

Dissolve and sue. The NHLPA could file a disclaimer of interest and dissolve the union. Once dissolved, the players could file an antitrust lawsuit requesting a court to declare the lockout unlawful, while also seeking compensation for lost wages. Since antitrust law provides for something called 'treble damages', which means triple damages, the players could get billions of dollars in compensation if this ever went to trial. Here's the math – the combined salaries of about 700 players (which is about a billion dollars) multiplied by 3.

That's a lot of money - and it's precisely that threat of antitrust litigation together with potentially catastrophic monetary damages that gains the players leverage in CBA talks.

Would the players ask a court to immediately lift the lockout?

First things first. There is an important distinction that needs to be made. The players can ask the court right off the bat to have the lockout lifted pending resolution of the matter at trial years from now. So the players would be arguing that it's an emergency that the lockout should be lifted right away, and given that it's an emergency they can't wait for a court to rule on the legality of the lockout at trial in a few years. So getting the lockout lifted temporarily within a month after filing the lawsuit is emergency relief.

That should be distinguished from a court ultimately finding that the lockout is unlawful at trial years from now – whether the lockout is or isn't still in place.

So there's emergency relief in the form of getting the lockout lifted right away, and there is ultimate relief years from now at trial. Two different things.

Now to answer your question in typical lawyer fashion – the players may or may not ask for the lockout to be lifted ASAP. We've seen both scenarios play out recently.

During the NFL lockout in 2011, the NFLPA asked the court for that emergency request to lift the lockout. In response, the lower court lifted the lockout, thereby re-opening the NFL for business. However, the NFL appealed the case, and the Appeals Court put the lockout back in place ruling that a judge in these circumstances didn't have the power to lift a lockout. That same court, though, was not saying that the lockout was legal. They were just saying at this really early stage of the court action they didn't have the authority to lift the lockout on an emergency basis. So that means it was still possible the court at trial could rule the lockout was ultimately unlawful, in which case the NFL could have owed the players billions of dollars in lost wages.

The NBA players took a different position in their own lawsuit during the 2011 lockout. Sensitive to the NFL Appeals Court decision keeping the lockout in place, the players decided not to ask the court to temporarily lift the lockout on an emergency basis. Instead, they asked the court to declare the lockout illegal much later at trial, while also seeking billions of dollars in lost wages.

So why didn't the NBA players ask to have the lockout lifted on an emergency basis?

Given the NFL decision, there was a risk that the court would have said that it couldn't lift the lockout on an emergency basis, thereby leaving it in place indefinitely. For the NBA players, that would have meant losing leverage.

So what are you saying?

The NHL players may not ask a court to temporarily lift the lockout on an emergency basis, and instead just ask for billions of dollars should the lockout be found illegal at trial. However, it's still possible they could make the request for emergency relief.

Wait. You keep talking about 'trial'. Would this ever get to trial?

No with a sprinkle of unlikely. To get this case to trial would take years. That just doesn't make a whole lot of sense for the NHL or its players. The league wants to get this settled in the short term and doesn't want to be embroiled in a court battle for years.

How does the NHL lawsuit in New York factor in?

The NHL has already filed a lawsuit in the state of New York, which historically is more sympathetic to owners than players. By being the first to file a lawsuit, it now becomes more difficult for the players to file a lawsuit about the same stuff in another state. Seeing this second lawsuit, a judge may say something like this: "Hey there's already a lawsuit about this somewhere else, and it was filed there first, so get out of my court". So that's why the NHL filed first – to secure home ice advantage and make it tougher for the players to file their own lawsuit in a more player friendly court – like one in California.

So option 1 is to dissolve then sue. What's option 2?

The NHLPA could elect not to dissolve itself. Fehr & Company could hope that the mere threat of dissolving the union with a view to initiating antitrust litigation is enough to extract leverage in these negotiations.

Which option is best?

Nothing applies pressure like a lawsuit. So from the standpoint of the players, Option 1 will be looked at very carefully. The bottom line, though, is the NHLPA needs to figure out what is best to get a deal done – and much of that will depend on how close the sides are to cutting a deal.

Eric, in your last article I told you I hated lawyers. Just to let you know, nothing has changed on that front.

I understand. My mom hasn't talked to me since I was called to the Bar. Something about majoring in 'Snakeism'.

Is there a drop dead deadline for the NHLPA to dissolve itself?

No. You've been hearing a lot that the NHLPA must dissolve by January 2. That's true – well sort of. The player vote that just passed authorizes the NHLPA to dissolve by January 2. However, if the NHLPA doesn't dissolve by then, it isn't barred from doing so at a later date. As well, the players could also vote to decertify the NHLPA, which is the players voting to no longer have the Union represent them (a disclaimer is the opposite – the union walking away from the players).

NHL players, like all employees, have a protected right to choose whether to have a union represent them. Employees not only have a basic right to bargain collectively through a union, they also have a corresponding right not to. The right to choose not to have a union and not to engage in collective bargaining exists before as well as after a collective bargaining relationship forms. This is fundamental to labor law.

The NHL is arguing that a disclaimer is just a sham designed to gain the players leverage. Does that hold water?

A disclaimer of interest must be in good faith. A union's mere statement that it's no longer representing the players may not be enough to discharge that good faith obligation. You need to look at the surrounding circumstances, including the conduct of the parties after dissolution, to determine if the union has really stopped representing the players. As was said in a case back in 1958 (which incidentally is when Elvis Presley was inducted into the U.S. Army), a disclaimer of interest is conducted in bad faith when it's "obviously employed only as a measure of momentary expedience, or strategy in bargaining."

That's what the NHL is arguing – the only reason the NHLPA would dissolve itself would be to gain leverage, and once they get what they want, they will just re-assemble the union. There is no real intention on the part of the NHLPA to abandon its players. On top of that, the NHL will argue that NHLPA executives will still be directing things behind the scenes.

This is a reasonable argument, and expect it to get some traction. Of late, we have seen the NFLPA and NBPA employ this disclaimer strategy, only to re-assemble later. A judge may not be happy with what is emerging as a new industry tactic in sport labor disputes and rule accordingly.

Eric, you have ended a few of your sentences with prepositions – are you embarrassed?

No, not really. I may, however, feel bad after.

If the NHLPA is dissolved, can Donald Fehr still negotiate on behalf of the players?

The idea behind the disclaimer is that the NHLPA is saying it's no longer representing the players. So Fehr can't on the one hand say the NHLPA is out of the picture, and on the other hand lead negotiations. If he did, the NHL's sham argument would be that much easier to make. So if the players sue, expect outside lawyers to take over negotiations. That's what happened in the NBA lawsuit.

How does this settle and get hockey back on the ice?

While CBA talks have spilled from the boardroom into the courtroom, lawsuits and judges won't get this settled. A deal will get done with the sides continuing to negotiate with a view to finding common areas of compromise. There is of course one thing that will drive settlement – a deadline. Pressure will mount on both sides as we near the NHL's deadline to cancel the season. The hope for hockey fans is that the sides don't collapse under the pressure and the season is lost like it was in 2005.

Given that there remain areas of compromise, this case has a profile for settlement. So it would be a surprise if we don't see NHL hockey this season. However, and as I'm sure you would agree, these talks have been filled with surprises.


  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#5243 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,457 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 23 December 2012 - 02:03 PM

Another great article for anyone interested: Canceler-in-Chief can’t see big picture

Here's a select quote:

The league’s proposed contract term limits are meant to devalue free agency. The league acts as if players spent the seven seasons under the expired collective bargaining agreement fleeing small markets for big markets even as all available evidence contradicts the theory.

There is also the NHL’s take-it-or-leave-it refusal to accept transition rules regarding amnesty buyouts and the 2013-14 cap that would present clubs mechanisms with which to comply to the new CBA. Rather, the league seems intent on punishing teams that obeyed every rule in the book while spending money in attempting to build champions.

Even if buyouts might add a small amount of money beyond the league’s magical yet utterly meaningless 50/50 split, — under 50/50, a $60M cap and a $44M floor, the Rangers would not be permitted to spend more than approximately 30 percent of their revenue on payroll while the Islanders would be forced to spend a minimum of 54 percent on players, according to 2011-12 Forbes’ revenue numbers that are adjusted for revenue sharing — the amount would be miniscule as compared to the lasting damage incurred by canceling this season.


  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#5244 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,048 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 23 December 2012 - 03:40 PM

LEGAL LOOK: NHLPA HAS AUTHORITY TO DISSOLVE - WHAT'S NEXT?

IMO there is a lot of wishful thinking mixed with the legalese in this article. An injunction to force the NHL back onto the ice simply is not going to happen especially with the idea that court battles could take years to conclude. Worse case sceanario for the NHL is a lockout until next fall. Just like 2005 when players realize that they could go another year without NHL hockey the majority will join a new union to represent their interest. A new union with + 50% of the old union will gut most of the legal actions any players could undertake. The NHL has lots of moves they could make to really heat this fight up fast. Veery sad.
  • 0

#5245 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,457 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 23 December 2012 - 04:32 PM

IMO there is a lot of wishful thinking mixed with the legalese in this article. An injunction to force the NHL back onto the ice simply is not going to happen especially with the idea that court battles could take years to conclude. Worse case sceanario for the NHL is a lockout until next fall. Just like 2005 when players realize that they could go another year without NHL hockey the majority will join a new union to represent their interest. A new union with + 50% of the old union will gut most of the legal actions any players could undertake. The NHL has lots of moves they could make to really heat this fight up fast. Veery sad.


Well, you're certainly right there is some guess work involved. But I don't think it's any more fair to call their take "wishful thinking" than yours. Injunctions are not that uncommon, especially in the interest of minimizing loses for BOTH parties. (An injunction, for example, would allow owners to get back to playing and making money without giving up their bargaining power or legal claims.) Players playing without a union (if that's even possible) or creating a new one that just gives in to owners what the same players find objectionable now is not common or even likely.

And this is nothing like 2005. The league does not have the fan or sports industry support it did then. The world economy is not as strong. The league is not releasing a report to show how poor they are this time because it's no longer true. The league is richer than it ever has been and has been thriving (to the tune of a 50% revenue increase since the last CBA) under a system the owners themselves designed. Whereas last time people saw the problem and why it needed to be fixed with a salary cap system, this time many see the problems the NHL has as being the NHL's own fault and having always been within their control to fix. Many also understand that even the NHL's own first ridiculous proposal would not make all teams profitable as it fails to address the fundamental issues. While they like to use the money losing teams to try to force players into getting less, their own proposed rules do nothing to help those teams. Despite what other leagues do and its proven success in maintaining league health, owners only want to increase their team revenue sharing to the percent of HRR they are demanding the players give up in this CBA negotiations. (Or, stated another way, they want players to entirely fund their team revenue sharing.)

Even the drop in the players' share won't help the lower teams. The NHL's own early lockout estimations showed they expected HRR to grow at least 7% over last season as soon as season 2 of the new CBA, meaning teams would be spending exactly what they were last season but with the new rules proposed by the NHL itself teams would no longer be able to use unpaid bonuses to reach the cap floor, meaning the poorest teams would be paying more in real dollars to reach the same number they had to reach last season. The NHL is only making things worse for the bottom teams, not better. And that alone makes this very different from 2005.

But I couldn't agree more than it's all very sad.

Edited by poetica, 23 December 2012 - 04:37 PM.

  • 1
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#5246 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68,211 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 23 December 2012 - 05:05 PM

Report: NHLPA might hold February outdoor game if season is canceled

https://twitter.com/...887756647550977
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#5247 SkeeterHansen

SkeeterHansen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,138 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 11

Posted 23 December 2012 - 05:08 PM

Report: NHLPA might hold February outdoor game if season is canceled

https://twitter.com/...887756647550977


That'd be really cool. Hopefully they can find a way to make it worthwhile for the fans...
  • 0
CANUCKS TILL I DIE

#5248 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 68,211 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 23 December 2012 - 05:13 PM

That'd be really cool. Hopefully they can find a way to make it worthwhile for the fans...


Yeah, it would be really cool. But hopefully everything gets resolved.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#5249 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,750 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 23 December 2012 - 05:25 PM

If it were anything like that dumb charity game, then it would suck. I don't want to watch a bunch of players floating around. I want to watch desperate NHL hockey that matters.
  • 1

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

Posted Image
2 0 14 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#5250 SkeeterHansen

SkeeterHansen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,138 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 11

Posted 23 December 2012 - 05:32 PM

If it were anything like that dumb charity game, then it would suck. I don't want to watch a bunch of players floating around. I want to watch desperate NHL hockey that matters.


Well it doesn't always workout the way you "want". Be grateful they're even doing something, they could be sitting on their hands staring at their stacks of money. At least they're trying to give back in some way.
  • 0
CANUCKS TILL I DIE




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.