Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

A "scab" league...


Recommended Posts

So i have a couple of questions to ask, mostly because im just curious about such things.

Is this lack of CBA a breech of contract for NHL players? Can they all legally quit and play for another league?

Cant we get a scab league or something? It seems that some owner could sell his team and instead start his own league... How hard could it be!? (... i know im ignorant, but really... why not!?)

anyone have a couple billion and a ton of lawyers laying around to get started!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I understand it, without a Collective agreement in place, they are free to play wherever they want. That's why we've got guys signing in Europe and directly with AHL and ECHL teams. However, if they ever get it together and agree on a new CBA, then all existing contracts would still be in force based on the provisions of that CBA.

So they can't just walk away completely.

As for starting a new league, the biggest problem after financing would be locations. Most of the best hockey towns already have NHL teams that have existing leases on the best buildings, or they own the building themselves as in the case of the Canucks. For those with leases, no doubt, do not allow the landlord to rent to a competing business. So where would they play that they would be able to get rinks big enough and a population substantial enough to support a new league?

As an example, look at the original WHA. It was mostly in non-NHL cities... Calgary, Houston, San Francisco, Quebec, Hartford, Winnipeg, Cleveland, etc. Of those that went to existing NHL cities they tried to rent from the NHL team and it was a disaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The union has no rights in the NHL right now. There is no Collective Bargaining Agreement. This means the NHL can simply go draft new players and use lower level replacement players until the new drafted players mature. Allow the new players to form a new NHL union and make a very similar deal they offered the NHLPA . Start playing under that new CBA.

Then wait and see if the NHLPA players will break with the union and come back to the new NHL union. Their other option is to de certify and try to sue the NHL to uphold their contract .

On the other hand, the current NHL players could try to form a new league which I always call a 'new WHA ' (World Hockey Association) . This turns them into owners and is not their strong suit. They know nothing of ownership nor marketing nor leasing arenas .

Even if they somehow got enough economic interest to form a few teams, they would be trying to compete with the NHL for the newly drafted talent and its unrealistic to believe any of them would prefer to play in this new WHA as opposed to just going to the NHL.

What is more likely is the NHLPA stars can travel around like the harlem globetrotters playing exhibitions for a while. Then they would have to go to the KHL or bend over and renounce their NHLPA membership and return to the NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The union has no rights in the NHL right now. There is no Collective Bargaining Agreement. This means the NHL can simply go draft new players and use lower level replacement players until the new drafted players mature. Allow the new players to form a new NHL union and make a very similar deal they offered the NHLPA . Start playing under that new CBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP you are incorrectly usiing the term 'scab'. If the players played in another league that won't be a 'scab' league since they are the ones locked out and the union isn't forbiding them to play else where. If the owners however hired non NHLPA players to play in a 'NHL' league then this new NHL would be a scab league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody keeps going on about the players forming their own league or the NHL bringing in scab players. I actually wonder what the chances (legal issues would be) of some of the owners breaking up the league and starting their own new one...?

You'd have to think most if not all of the Canadian teams and the guys from the likes of Detroit, NYR, Pits etc would at least consider it. They've already got the arenas and I assume rights to their team logos etc that everyone keeps bringing up. I'd wager they could come up with an agreeable CBA with the "New League" PA as they tend to be the "rich" teams. They'd have to negotiate new media/sponsor agreements but that wouldn't likely be TOO difficult given existing framework.

This would allow them to also ditch the money siphons of the league (I'm looking at you Phoenix) allowing them to likely keep more of their own profits and ditch douche nozzles like Jacobs if they choose or at the very least remove him from his current position of power if they decide to let him in their sandbox.

If I was one of those owners I'd be looking in to it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I have said for a few weeks that the PA should put a drop dead date for when they are willing to negotiate for this season.

Players are obligated to comeback an honour their contracts if a deal is reached. It is stopping many of them from seeking and getting alternate employment. European teams and other leagues would be much more willing to sign guys if they knew they would have them the entire season.

If the PA makes it clear that after say the 15th of December they will only be negotiating a CBA for the 2013-2014 season.

Players would then make other plans en masse, and the owners would have a real gut check on whether they want to lose the season or not. Right now they just think they can squeeze for a few more concessions and have all the control.

I can totally see the players and PA having a mini-league for the rest of the year with no NHL. Whatever players don't find employment in other leagues can do a bunch of those Bieksa's buddies type of games. There is plenty of demand for a couple of games like this a week in most of the major markets. You play in the secondary arenas in each town; give XX% of the gate to charities; have the players on the winning team of each game get to choose the charities of their choice to spur competition; get into a broadcast deal for the games; etc.

You even have a reasonable chance of winning a court battle to actually award the Stanley Cup for your playoffs. The NHL doesn't own it, and it is owned by the league with the highest level of hockey competition in North America. Pretty good argument that any other league beats out the NHL which plays no games. Any one of the lower leagues could make this case, but they don't really want to sour their relationship with the NHL by doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You even have a reasonable chance of winning a court battle to actually award the Stanley Cup for your playoffs.  The NHL doesn't own it, and it is owned by the league with the highest level of hockey competition in North America.  Pretty good argument that any other league beats out the NHL which plays no games.  Any one of the lower leagues could make this case, but they don't really want to sour their relationship with the NHL by doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about labour laws elsewhere, but BC does have a law against the use of replacement workers during a labour dispute. I believe Ontario and Quebec have similar rules. So although that may be permitted in the U.S. as we saw with the NFL Referees, you couldn't do that here. The Canucks would have to play all their games on the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I have said for a few weeks that the PA should put a drop dead date for when they are willing to negotiate for this season.

Players are obligated to comeback an honour their contracts if a deal is reached. It is stopping many of them from seeking and getting alternate employment. European teams and other leagues would be much more willing to sign guys if they knew they would have them the entire season.

If the PA makes it clear that after say the 15th of December they will only be negotiating a CBA for the 2013-2014 season.

Players would then make other plans en masse, and the owners would have a real gut check on whether they want to lose the season or not. Right now they just think they can squeeze for a few more concessions and have all the control.

I can totally see the players and PA having a mini-league for the rest of the year with no NHL. Whatever players don't find employment in other leagues can do a bunch of those Bieksa's buddies type of games. There is plenty of demand for a couple of games like this a week in most of the major markets. You play in the secondary arenas in each town; give XX% of the gate to charities; have the players on the winning team of each game get to choose the charities of their choice to spur competition; get into a broadcast deal for the games; etc.

You even have a reasonable chance of winning a court battle to actually award the Stanley Cup for your playoffs. The NHL doesn't own it, and it is owned by the league with the highest level of hockey competition in North America. Pretty good argument that any other league beats out the NHL which plays no games. Any one of the lower leagues could make this case, but they don't really want to sour their relationship with the NHL by doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NHLPA controls the players, without the best players in the world there is no NHL level hockey peroid. The NHL markets players but the NHLPA has the power to decide if these players play or not. If the PA had no power there would be NHL hockey now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isnt a labor dispute. A labor dispute is when employees or contractors have a dispute with ownership or vice versa.

This is not that case. This is a labor force who has no contract. They dont work for the NHL anymore. If the owners had locked them out under a current CBA , then there would be a legitimate beef by the players. Or the players went on an illegal strike under contract. Or there was some work condition that was not kosher.

This is simply like living in an apartment and your lease runs out. The landlord can give you due notice to leave and rent it to someone else or try to negotiate a new lease (under whatever is legal in BC)

So the players are in over their heads on this one. This is exactly how the owners locked them out for a year last time. They own the league and the players own nothing.

I think its quite a myth for fans to think the NHLPA owns anything or has any rights over the league when it no longer has a Collective Bargaining Agreement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the NHL owns the league and the NHLPA owns the current group of players who play in the NHL. They have a union whereas they can decide not to play in the NHL. Fair enough.

Can you explain how this 'union' stops the NHL from getting AHL and otherwise European players to come play in the NHL . More importantly, how does the NHLPA stop the new players from being drafted into the NHL and forming a new union with the scab players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh? This fits exactly the definition of a labour dispute. Their collective agreement has run out, they need a new one and neither side can agree on what that will be.

The way you write it, any employer that doesn't like its union could just wait until their collective agreement runs out and then walk away from the union. But it just doesn't work that way. It's nothing like living in an apartment.

In BC, at the very least, once your workforce unionizes you have no choice but to work with that unionized workforce. You cannot simply choose to switch to another workforce. That's part of the power that the players have here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They don't stop them. That's not the point.

The point is they have a highly inferior quality player pool which will have a negative effect on the league's ability to sell tickets, sell TV rights, sell sponsorship, sell merchandise and in a very broad sense, (and the one that matters most to the owners) a VERY negative effect on their ability to make a profit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But thats only temporarily. They are continually replacing the players now, let alone under 'scab' conditions. And further to this, why would the lower level guys...........such as say Kyle Wellwood or Taylor Pyatt............agree to sit out as an NHLPA member instead of simply breaking with the union and coming back to the NHL ?

What would stop them from doing that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody keeps going on about the players forming their own league or the NHL bringing in scab players. I actually wonder what the chances (legal issues would be) of some of the owners breaking up the league and starting their own new one...?

You'd have to think most if not all of the Canadian teams and the guys from the likes of Detroit, NYR, Pits etc would at least consider it. They've already got the arenas and I assume rights to their team logos etc that everyone keeps bringing up. I'd wager they could come up with an agreeable CBA with the "New League" PA as they tend to be the "rich" teams. They'd have to negotiate new media/sponsor agreements but that wouldn't likely be TOO difficult given existing framework.

This would allow them to also ditch the money siphons of the league (I'm looking at you Phoenix) allowing them to likely keep more of their own profits and ditch douche nozzles like Jacobs if they choose or at the very least remove him from his current position of power if they decide to let him in their sandbox.

If I was one of those owners I'd be looking in to it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...