HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   Looking towards the future... CBA's should be signed long before the current CBA ends (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1276907)

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 08:40 PM

Looking towards the future... CBA's should be signed long before the current CBA ends
 
For example, on a 6 year CBA deal - The players and owners should begin negotiating in the third/fourth year of the current CBA so that when the old CBA expires, they can seamlessly transition into the new one (without affecting fans or the bottom line).

Had the two sides begun negotiating in 2010-2011, we would not be experiencing the current lockout.

Krishna 10-28-2012 08:42 PM

I'd say they should move back the expiring time to maybe june 1st or so. Gives more time to negotiate before the training camps open

LPHabsFan 10-28-2012 08:43 PM

The NHL tried to start negotiating early and was ignored. And as we've seen everything is dictated by time and pressure. Even if it ends on July 1st, there won't be any pressure to negotiate until the end of September.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LPHabsFan (Post 55359217)
The NHL tried to start negotiating early and was ignored. And as we've seen everything is dictated by time and pressure. Even if it ends on July 1st, there won't be any pressure to negotiate until the end of September.

That's why early negotiation needs to be a mandatory part of the new CBA. That's what I'm saying - negotiation should be mandatory and a deal should have to be signed prior to the expiration of the current CBA.

Furthermore, binding arbitration needs to be written into the new CBA for all future CBAs on both sides. Lockouts and strikes, especially with both sides pushing, need to be examined and declared illegal when necessary, by the Supreme Court of the United States of America. The High Courts need to intervene, step in, and make them drop the puck.

Krishna 10-28-2012 08:51 PM

Why would any side agree to that?

LPHabsFan 10-28-2012 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut (Post 55359265)
That's why early negotiation needs to be a mandatory part of the new CBA. That's what I'm saying - negotiation should be mandatory and a deal should have to be signed prior to the expiration of the current CBA.

Furthermore, binding arbitration needs to be written into the new CBA for all future CBAs on both sides. Lockouts and strikes, especially with both sides pushing, need to be examined and declared illegal when necessary, by the Supreme Court of the United States of America. The High Courts need to intervene, step in, and make them drop the puck.

I agree with you in spirit and I feel your frustration and empathize with it. However, as was pointed out just above, their is simply no logical reason for either side to agree to those stipulations. And lockout and strikes I believe can only be deemed illegal if there are no unions; ie: decertification. But I'm not a lawyer though I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.






No I didn't....

MoreOrr 10-28-2012 09:05 PM

All players should be wary of negotiating any contract that goes beyond the date of the CBA's expiration. But then of course that too will play right into the owners hands, as they'd also like to eliminate long-term contracts.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LPHabsFan (Post 55359815)
I agree with you in spirit and I feel your frustration and empathize with it. However, as was pointed out just above, their is simply no logical reason for either side to agree to those stipulations. And lockout and strikes I believe can only be deemed illegal if there are no unions; ie: decertification. But I'm not a lawyer though I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.






No I didn't....

Yes there is - the Supreme Court could penalize them for billions of dollars on both sides, order a revocation of all monies earned by the NHLPA and refund them all to the cities that built those arenas with taxpayer dollars and all of the people who are losing money and jobs as a result of the lockout, strike, etc.

Ideally, the working class and middle class workers who are affected by this will rally. Those are the people who need a labor union.

MXD 10-28-2012 09:38 PM

The problem is -- problems are identified over time.

Start to negociate 3 years in advance, and you're lacking quite a bit of information.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krishna (Post 55359479)
Why would any side agree to that?

Because if they don't, the Supreme Court will revoke their earnings and/or criminally charge them.

That's what needs to happen here - the Supreme Court needs to voluntarily intervene and take control of the lockout situation for the sake of the working class and middle class workers who are affected by the lockout, and issue a percentage of HRR to those people.

This is no longer about the Players or the Owners. This situation affects two countries and 30+ cities.

We need binding, court-ordered arbitration.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MXD (Post 55361121)
The problem is -- problems are identified over time.

Start to negociate 3 years in advance, and you're lacking quite a bit of information.

Well, then I guess you had better hire some people who can actually comprehend that information instead of the current occupants.

Krishna 10-28-2012 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut (Post 55361127)
Because if they don't, the Supreme Court will revoke their earnings and/or criminally charge them.

That's what needs to happen here - the Supreme Court needs to voluntarily intervene and take control of the lockout situation for the sake of the working class and middle class workers who are affected by the lockout, and issue a percentage of HRR to those people.

This is no longer about the Players or the Owners. This situation affects two countries and 30+ cities.

We need binding, court-ordered arbitration.

The supreme court has other crap on their plate. They don't give a damn about the NHL.

CanadianHockey 10-28-2012 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut (Post 55361127)
Because if they don't, the Supreme Court will revoke their earnings and/or criminally charge them.

That's what needs to happen here - the Supreme Court needs to voluntarily intervene and take control of the lockout situation for the sake of the working class and middle class workers who are affected by the lockout, and issue a percentage of HRR to those people.

This is no longer about the Players or the Owners. This situation affects two countries and 30+ cities.

We need binding, court-ordered arbitration.

Yeah... not ever happening.

No court wants to waste resources over the NHL and NHLPA. Besides, courts don't just 'intervene'. There needs to be a legal case to bring to the court.


With regard to early negotiation, I agree that both parties should commit themselves to avoiding a lockout or strike. Unfortunately, neither party wants to do that because this is a prisoner's dilemma scenario. Their 'best' possible individual outcome is that they strike or lockout and the other side capitulates entirely due to the pressure of the strike/lockout. The best collective outcome is for them to meet in the middle in advance of the season.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CanadianHockey (Post 55361429)
Yeah... not ever happening.

No court wants to waste resources over the NHL and NHLPA.

The fans can make it happen... one way or another.

Worse comes to worse?

Hypothetically, of course, the Supreme Court would have to step in.

Ogopogo* 10-28-2012 09:49 PM

LOL - ya think?

Both sides like having a work stoppage as leverage. Nobody is going to negotiate that early - Fehr wouldn't even negotiate until July this year.

Krishna 10-28-2012 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut (Post 55361493)
The fans can make it happen... one way or another.

Worse comes to worse?

Hypothetically, of course, the Supreme Court would have to step in.

Do you actually know how the Supreme court gets it's cases?

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ogopogo (Post 55361505)
LOL - ya think?

Both sides like having a work stoppage as leverage. Nobody is going to negotiate that early - Fehr wouldn't even negotiate until July this year.

It doesn't matter what they want. The consumers, the fans, really own the league. The working class and middle class employees make the league happen. Without us there is no NHL.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krishna (Post 55361563)
Do you actually know how the Supreme court gets it's cases?

"Nearly all cases come before the court by way of petitions for writs of certiorari, commonly referred to as "cert". The Court may review any case in the federal courts of appeals "by writ of certiorari granted upon the petition of any party to any civil or criminal case".The Court may only review "final judgments rendered by the highest court of a state in which a decision could be had" if those judgments involve a question of federal statutory or constitutional law.The party that lost in the lower court is the petitioner and the party that prevailed is the respondent."

In this case, no individual county or state jurisdiction could rule, so the case would go directly to the Supreme Court

Krishna 10-28-2012 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut (Post 55361671)
"Nearly all cases come before the court by way of petitions for writs of certiorari, commonly referred to as "cert". The Court may review any case in the federal courts of appeals "by writ of certiorari granted upon the petition of any party to any civil or criminal case".The Court may only review "final judgments rendered by the highest court of a state in which a decision could be had" if those judgments involve a question of federal statutory or constitutional law.The party that lost in the lower court is the petitioner and the party that prevailed is the respondent."

In this case, no individual county or state jurisdiction could rule, so the case would go directly to the Supreme Court

Now please explain what laws are being broken that would cause the Supreme court to hear the case.

And the NHL would more than likely fall under the New York state laws since that's where their headquarters are.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krishna (Post 55361791)
Now please explain what laws are being broken that would cause the Supreme court to hear the case.

Embezzlement (use of taxpayer money for games - not properly refunded), Fraud, Anti-Trust (a full examination of whether the NHLPA and NHL are actually unlawful Trusts), all the way down to simple Tax Fraud, on an individual basis, for every player in the league. There are at least 50+ possible legal violations, as long as there's good faith belief that they exist, an inquiry could be created. Enough fans believe that something illegal is going on - where there's smoke, there's fire. That's how democracy works, and that's how the courts work.

The courts could also examine the legality of each player's individual contract and potentially declare all of them null and void.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krishna (Post 55361791)
And the NHL would more than likely fall under the New York state laws since that's where their headquarters are.

The violations happen in multiple states, thus automatically making it a federal case.

kdb209 10-28-2012 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut (Post 55361009)
Yes there is - the Supreme Court could penalize them for billions of dollars on both sides, order a revocation of all monies earned by the NHLPA and refund them all to the cities that built those arenas with taxpayer dollars and all of the people who are losing money and jobs as a result of the lockout, strike, etc.

Ideally, the working class and middle class workers who are affected by this will rally. Those are the people who need a labor union.

Huh????

The SCOTUS has absolutely no authority whatsoever to do any of those things.

Theoretically congress could amend the NLRA and remove the rights of either party to strike or lockout - or impose federally mandated mediation or arbitration - but there is zerp evidence of any interest, nor any compelling reason for them to get involved in any way whatsoever.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* 10-28-2012 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kdb209 (Post 55361971)
Huh????

The SCOTUS has absolutely no authority whatsoever to do any of those things.

Theoretically congress could amend the NLRA and remove the rights of either party to strike or lockout - or impose federally mandated mediation or arbitration - but there is zerp evidence of any interest, nor any compelling reason for them to get involved in any way whatsoever.

Probable cause. If you can prove that there's even an inkling of a possibility that the contracts are illegal, that the CBA is illegal or that the NHL or NHLPA are Trusts, they will leave no stone unturned. Not only do they have the authority to do it, they have the responsibility to do it in high profile cases.

There's plenty of reasons to do it, especially in an election year. It should already be done. No tactics should be spared at this point, nor should any restraint be used. The show must go on at any cost.

Krishna 10-28-2012 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut (Post 55361931)
Embezzlement (use of taxpayer money for games - not properly refunded), Fraud, Anti-Trust (a full examination of whether the NHLPA and NHL are actually unlawful Trusts), all the way down to simple Tax Fraud, on an individual basis, for every player in the league. There are at least 50+ possible legal violations, as long as there's good faith belief that they exist, an inquiry could be created. Enough fans believe that something illegal is going on - where there's smoke, there's fire. That's how democracy works, and that's how the courts work.

The courts could also examine the legality of each player's individual contract and potentially declare all of them null and void.



The violations happen in multiple states, thus automatically making it a federal case.

You actually think that each player in the league is taking part in tax fraud? They have the IRS that checks for that. The players don't really know the difference between revenue and profit and you think they are intelligent enough to commit tax fraud without being caught? :laugh:

Darth Bangkok 10-28-2012 10:10 PM

The next cba should stipulate that if there is no new cba agreed to within two months of its expiration, it automatically gets extended one more year. This keeps happening until a new one is agreed to.

Krishna 10-28-2012 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth Bangkok (Post 55362219)
The next cba should stipulate that if there is no new cba agreed to within two months of its expiration, it automatically gets extended one more year. This keeps happening until a new one is agreed to.

Why would the side who is winning the deal, the players in this case, ever agree to a change in that case?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:08 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.