HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   Can the Union decertify? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1260137)

Melrose Munch 09-15-2012 09:55 AM

Can the Union decertify?
 
Can the Union decertify? And how would that effect negotiations with the league?

JAX 09-15-2012 10:05 AM

I don't think they would want to, they need official representation especially during cba negotiations.

Motown Beatdown 09-15-2012 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAX (Post 54338313)
I don't think they would want to, they need official representation especially during cba negotiations.


Didn't stop the NFLPA. They decertified and Maurice Smith (i think that's his name) still represented them in negations with the owners. After they agreed on a deal they before a "union" again

JAX 09-15-2012 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Motown Beatdown (Post 54338895)
Didn't stop the NFLPA. They decertified and Maurice Smith (i think that's his name) still represented them in negations with the owners. After they agreed on a deal they before a "union" again

Well, that doesn't mean it's the best thing for the NHL players because it happened before. The negotiations that are going have teams of lawers crossing every t and dotting every I. Do you really think 1 player should go through a process such as this? Not to mention these negotiations are going to get ugly.

Joe T Choker 09-15-2012 10:43 AM

they don't need to decertify ... they can sign with the KHL (for 65% of their NHL contracts) & the youngsters can play in the AHL

Egil 09-15-2012 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melrose Munch (Post 54338097)
Can the Union decertify? And how would that effect negotiations with the league?

The union can certainly decertify, and this was done by both the NBAPA and the NFLPA. With no union, the league would be unable to lock out the players. However, the NFL and NBA both locked out the players while court proceedings took place over the legality of the dercertification.

What this means is that the NHLPA decertifying right now would be useless, as the lockout would occur regardless. BUT, if one of these PA's decertifies long before the CBA expiration date, then it is a different kettle of fish. I expect one of these three PA's to explore an advanced decertification in the future, as the current CBA's in the NHL, NFL and NBA all work to artificially lower player salaries.

JAX 09-15-2012 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoarding Assets (Post 54339229)
they don't need to decertify ... they can sign with the KHL (for 65% of their NHL contracts) & the youngsters can play in the AHL

The KHL has already stated they are only going to be taking a certain amount of players....mostly high level players only.

vBurmi 09-15-2012 11:58 AM

IMO the CBA hurts the star players salaries but helps the 3rd/4th line players immensely. For instance, in a totally free market system players like Crosby could pull in, say, $15-20M a year due to all the revenue they bring in. Conversely, AHL call-ups, fringe players, bottom-6 talent, etc. would likely not meet what is currently the minimum salary or even close to it. Just as an uncapped system would wreak havoc on parity amongst the teams, so too would it wreak havoc on any sort of parity in player salaries.

What I'm getting at is this: If the union was going to decertify to get away from a cap system that artificially lowered player salaries, I'd assume they'd need some sort of majority vote. If the majority of the players had any common sense, they'd avoid such a scenario at all costs.

Also, to clarify, as a fan I don't care about who makes what or how well fringe NHLers are paid. I do care about parity amongst the teams just as I assume most fans do. The above rationale was written with respect to the majority of the players in the PA though.

powerstuck 09-15-2012 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Egil (Post 54340523)
The union can certainly decertify, and this was done by both the NBAPA and the NFLPA. With no union, the league would be unable to lock out the players. However, the NFL and NBA both locked out the players while court proceedings took place over the legality of the dercertification.

What this means is that the NHLPA decertifying right now would be useless, as the lockout would occur regardless. BUT, if one of these PA's decertifies long before the CBA expiration date, then it is a different kettle of fish. I expect one of these three PA's to explore an advanced decertification in the future, as the current CBA's in the NHL, NFL and NBA all work to artificially lower player salaries.

Basically it's 5 past midnight to even think about it.

Egil 09-15-2012 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerstuck (Post 54340887)
Basically it's 5 past midnight to even think about it.

Yep!

Pepper 09-15-2012 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoarding Assets (Post 54339229)
they don't need to decertify ... they can sign with the KHL (for 65% of their NHL contracts) & the youngsters can play in the AHL

LMAO!

Average salary in the NHL is ~2.4M or so. The average salary of KHL is below 500K. Niklas Hagman is the highest paid player of Lokomotiv and he makes roughly 2M.

KHL has strict rules for signing lock-out NHL players. There's room for maybe couple dozen non-russian players.

KHL and Europe are not real options for huge majority of NHL players.

Declassified 09-15-2012 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pepper (Post 54342387)
LMAO!

Average salary in the NHL is ~2.4M or so. The average salary of KHL is below 500K. Niklas Hagman is the highest paid player of Lokomotiv and he makes roughly 2M.

KHL has strict rules for signing lock-out NHL players. There's room for maybe couple dozen non-russian players.

KHL and Europe are not real options for huge majority of NHL players.

has it shouldn't be, especially if they are unionized.

Shawa666 09-15-2012 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pepper (Post 54342387)
LMAO!

Average salary in the NHL is ~2.4M or so. The average salary of KHL is below 500K. Niklas Hagman is the highest paid player of Lokomotiv and he makes roughly 2M.

KHL has strict rules for signing lock-out NHL players. There's room for maybe couple dozen non-russian players.

KHL and Europe are not real options for huge majority of NHL players.

But, but, according to the PA, the poor paying morons are tripping over themselves to pay 70-80 bucks a night to see them play. Surely it will happen in the KHL, AHL or NHLPAL, right?

cam042686 09-16-2012 11:09 AM

I practice Labor Relations in Ontario and the answer to the question is no. Under Ontario law a union may only de-certify in the final 3 months of a collective agreement and before the union has given notice of intention to bargain a new agreement. The NHLPA has given this notice.

Please everyone keep in mind that US Labor law does not apply in Canada. It is meaningless here.

Craig Wallace

Falconone 09-16-2012 11:47 AM

Anti trust
 
Most professional sports leagues enjoy exemtion from the Sherman Anti Trust act in the US. Does Canada have a similar law and does the NHL have exemption?

Basically, the law acts to prevent competitive companies in various industries from making agreements to limit competion in their respective industries.

In the past, despite exemption, the US government has threatened to remove professional sports teams from the Anti Trust act as a way to force franchises/leagues to bargain in good faith.

I trust no one believes that the NHL is bargaining in good faith.

This is union busting of the first and highest order of magnitude.

F1

Mr Writer 09-16-2012 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falconone (Post 54366495)
Most professional sports leagues enjoy exemtion from the Sherman Anti Trust act in the US. Does Canada have a similar law and does the NHL have exemption?

Basically, the law acts to prevent competitive companies in various industries from making agreements to limit competion in their respective industries.

In the past, despite exemption, the US government has threatened to remove professional sports teams from the Anti Trust act as a way to force franchises/leagues to bargain in good faith.

I trust no one believes that the NHL is bargaining in good faith.

This is union busting of the first and highest order of magnitude.

F1

You got that right.

Sanderson 09-16-2012 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falconone (Post 54366495)
Most professional sports leagues enjoy exemtion from the Sherman Anti Trust act in the US. Does Canada have a similar law and does the NHL have exemption?

Basically, the law acts to prevent competitive companies in various industries from making agreements to limit competion in their respective industries.

In the past, despite exemption, the US government has threatened to remove professional sports teams from the Anti Trust act as a way to force franchises/leagues to bargain in good faith.

I trust no one believes that the NHL is bargaining in good faith.

This is union busting of the first and highest order of magnitude.

F1

Right. That's why the owners asked multiple times to start negotiating, which the players rejected. It's the players who stalled the whole process and it's the players who don't move one bit, unlike the owners, whose offers went from horrible to less horrible to bad, while the players stayed at horrible the whole time.

If anyone isn't negotiating in good faith it's the players.

kdb209 09-16-2012 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falconone (Post 54366495)
Most professional sports leagues enjoy exemtion from the Sherman Anti Trust act in the US. Does Canada have a similar law and does the NHL have exemption?

Basically, the law acts to prevent competitive companies in various industries from making agreements to limit competion in their respective industries.

In the past, despite exemption, the US government has threatened to remove professional sports teams from the Anti Trust act as a way to force franchises/leagues to bargain in good faith.

I trust no one believes that the NHL is bargaining in good faith.

This is union busting of the first and highest order of magnitude.

F1

Nope. The only League that has/had an anti-trust exemption was MLB - due to a flawed 1922 Supreme Court decision that baseball was not interstate commerce (a decision that the SCOTUS has already said was wrong, but passed the buck to congress to change if they choose). Courts have unanimously refused to extend that exemption to other sports (*). And congress has revoked MLB's exemption w.r.t. labor issues.

Other sports have exemptions only for terms negotiated under a CBA - the Non Statutory Labor Exemption.

(*) MLS has an exemption for a different reason - courts have ruled, that as a Single Entity ownership model, it is not subject to Section 1 of teh Sherman Act.

thinkwild 09-16-2012 12:03 PM

As Craig said above, it would rightly be seen as a shady tactic if the PA were to enter into a process of collective bargaining and then they decertify because they dont like where it is going.

But as Egil suggested above, if after negotiating a new cba, and after 3 years as Tom Benjamins blog suggested, they can probably then decertify legally.

Now at that point, a long way into the future, slowly over the years various court cases would start being filed by the players and others. Starting with the draft perhaps. Microsoft and Google cant draft engineers and refuse them employment unless they go through that draft.

Shortly after that, any restrictions on salaries such as restricted free agency and salary caps would be tested.

You never know how a court will rule, and the league has pretty good lawyers, but it is believed the owners would largely start losing all those cases and the current cba's.

Then they would have to rely on their ingenuity, management skills, and relationship building in order to build championship teams and make gobs of money. And if their spending on salaries causes them to lose money, they will have to spend less on salaries.

The cba protects the bottom rung of players. If Crosby were on a truly free market, how much would he be worth to the Pens? Their franchise value? But the top players in the game agree to these cba's to share their revenues with the bottom end players in a kind of revenue sharing structure for players. And as revenues have been rising, the top players are taking even a smaller percentage allowing the bottom players to take even a larger percentage of the marginal revenues.

The CBA also allows the league to put in place all sorts of rules that help to create a fair and balanced league that would otherwise be deemed illegal in a normal market. It even goes so far as to even try to take all sort of different franchise shapes and jam them into 30 equal round holes.

In return for all these concession players make in a nod to fairness, ...

Falconone 09-16-2012 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kdb209 (Post 54366747)
Nope. The only League that has/had an anti-trust exemption was MLB - due to a flawed 1922 Supreme Court decision that baseball was not interstate commerce (a decision that the SCOTUS has already said was wrong, but passed the buck to congress to change if they choose). Courts have unanimously refused to extend that exemption to other sports (*). And congress has revoked MLB's exemption w.r.t. labor issues.

Other sports have exemptions only for terms negotiated under a CBA - the Non Statutory Labor Exemption.

(*) MLS has an exemption for a different reason - courts have ruled, that as a Single Entity ownership model, it is not subject to Section 1 of teh Sherman Act.

Well if you are right, and I'm not saying you aren't, then the simple answer is for Federal prosecutors to file subpeona's for all communications between the owners of NHL frnachises. Becuase they are colluding to restrict negotiations and failing to negotiate in good faith.

This round, as was the last one, is being organized by a handful of owners and led by Jeremy Jacobs.

Falconone 09-16-2012 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sanderson (Post 54366709)
Right. That's why the owners asked multiple times to start negotiating, which the players rejected. It's the players who stalled the whole process and it's the players who don't move one bit, unlike the owners, whose offers went from horrible to less horrible to bad, while the players stayed at horrible the whole time.

If anyone isn't negotiating in good faith it's the players.

Unfortunately, you are wrong. To make matters worse, the league started from a position with both salary and labor give backs that would make Jimmy Hoffa return from his grave.

This is about power, and absolute power at that. And absolute power corrupts, absolutely.

F1

broinwhyteridge 09-16-2012 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falconone (Post 54378045)
Well if you are right, and I'm not saying you aren't, then the simple answer is for Federal prosecutors to file subpeona's for all communications between the owners of NHL frnachises. Becuase they are colluding to restrict negotiations and failing to negotiate in good faith.

This round, as was the last one, is being organized by a handful of owners and led by Jeremy Jacobs.

Amazing the level of insight you have to know all that for a fact.

WilderPegasus* 09-16-2012 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vBurmi (Post 54340795)
IMO the CBA hurts the star players salaries but helps the 3rd/4th line players immensely. For instance, in a totally free market system players like Crosby could pull in, say, $15-20M a year due to all the revenue they bring in. Conversely, AHL call-ups, fringe players, bottom-6 talent, etc. would likely not meet what is currently the minimum salary or even close to it. Just as an uncapped system would wreak havoc on parity amongst the teams, so too would it wreak havoc on any sort of parity in player salaries.

What I'm getting at is this: If the union was going to decertify to get away from a cap system that artificially lowered player salaries, I'd assume they'd need some sort of majority vote. If the majority of the players had any common sense, they'd avoid such a scenario at all costs.

Since the majority of NHL players don't make the league minimum, I don't think there would be much difficulty in getting the majority of players to decertify on those grounds.

A player making more than the league minimum would continue to make that, or more, in a free market because otherwise why wouldn't the team either pay them more than the league minimum or just replace them with someone who would play for the league minimum.

supahdupah 09-16-2012 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilderPegasus (Post 54378493)
Since the majority of NHL players don't make the league minimum, I don't think there would be much difficulty in getting the majority of players to decertify on those grounds.

A player making more than the league minimum would continue to make that, or more, in a free market because otherwise why wouldn't the team either pay them more than the league minimum or just replace them with someone who would play for the league minimum.

You might want to think about that a bit longer.

WilderPegasus* 09-16-2012 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by supahdupah (Post 54379481)
You might want to think about that a bit longer.

Nope. I've thought about it enough to be right.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:09 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.