HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   NHLPA starts another 'disclaimer' vote (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1315477)

cbcwpg 01-03-2013 04:43 PM

NHLPA starts another 'disclaimer' vote
 
NHLPA starts another 'disclaimer' vote

http://metronews.ca/sports/494879/nh...sclaimer-vote/

Less than a day after letting a self-imposed deadline pass to declare a “disclaimer of interest,” NHL players were set to begin voting to restore their executive board’s authority to dissolve the union.

The NHLPA’s membership was scheduled to begin voting on the disclaimer at 6 p.m. ET on Thursday, according to a source. It will be conducted over a 48-hour period


NHLPA voting again. I guess they just want to be ready to "disclaim" when it all comes crashing down in the next couple of days?

Bourne Endeavor 01-03-2013 04:47 PM

:facepalm:

In what universe to they believe the courts would not laugh them out? This is a bloody mockery.

Tkachuk4MVP 01-03-2013 04:49 PM

What a freaking sideshow.

H2ODP 01-03-2013 04:52 PM

Glad to see that the NHLPA is taking these negotiations seriously.. :sarcasm:

BLONG7 01-03-2013 04:55 PM

They are not bluffing this time...;)

CanadianPirate 01-03-2013 04:57 PM

Apparently the reason for the pa doing this might be because of the NHL returning to a hard line stance.

Eric Macramalla ‏@EricOnSportsLaw
I warned here yesterday that once disclaimer deadline passed NHL might revert back to less favourable terms - may be happening

KINGS17 01-03-2013 04:59 PM

Do it. I want to see Fehr lead these guys right off the disclaimer cliff.

As far as the owners taking a harder line, they may have told the NHL that their best and final offer is on the table, and this time they mean it. Fehr is running out of time.

howie789 01-03-2013 05:00 PM

Last week - IIRC - didn't the owners say "cancelling the season is not an option". So what gives here? Are they sticking to that?

Conflicted Habs fan 01-03-2013 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by howie789 (Post 57076475)
Last week - IIRC - didn't the owners say "cancelling the season is not an option". So what gives here? Are they sticking to that?

That was ruse by Bettman, another trick.
This merely indicates Bettman was disingenuous all along. He only wanted to appear like he was "negotiating" so as to counter claim the players when they take owners to court.

GKJ 01-03-2013 05:14 PM

They're doing it because holding it over the owners' head has been working. And it wouldn't have worked before if they kept doing it over and over until their bluffed was called. Now they're just taking Bettman up on his threat that there is a drop dead date, because if the drop dead date isn't the drop dead date, the owners are going to fall apart. If Bettman was serious about ever having more than half of a season, he would have forced the players to this point in November if he would have simply cancelled the season then like he should have.

Both sides know this will be settled in a conference room, not a court room.

haseoke39 01-03-2013 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conflicted Habs fan (Post 57076603)
That was ruse by Bettman, another trick.
This merely indicates Bettman was disingenuous all along. He only wanted to appear like he was "negotiating" so as to counter claim the players when they take owners to court.

How the hell hasn't Bettman been negotiating? His offers have improved every two weeks like clockwork since August. How can you say that kind of thing seriously?

CanadianHockey 01-03-2013 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haseoke39 (Post 57077041)
How the hell hasn't Bettman been negotiating? His offers have improved every two weeks like clockwork since August. How can you say that kind of thing seriously?

To be fair, the NHL's first proposals were pretty extreme. Easy to make it look like you're negotiating more than the other side when your first proposal was as far off the map as the NHL's was.

saillias 01-03-2013 05:22 PM

This is so petty and ridiculous. Both sides know that the PA won't disclaim. And yet, the PA is going to go through with the 48-hour pretend-disclaim thing again just as a partisan bargaining chip. To win what, 5 million in cap space, 1 year on contract length, and 1 year on CBA term?

Whileee 01-03-2013 05:27 PM

I think that the first "disclaimer" vote was a transparent attempt to increase the bargaining position of the NHLPA. Having the NHLPA in intense back and forth negotiations while they have an overwhelming authorization to "disclaim interest" seems to confirm the fact that the vote was a negotiating ploy.

I think that the upcoming vote might be in preparation for the possibility that the season is cancelled. If that occurred, then I can certainly see the NHLPA going "nuclear" through the courts. Why not give it a go, if the season is lost anyway?

haseoke39 01-03-2013 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CanadianHockey (Post 57077263)
To be fair, the NHL's first proposals were pretty extreme. Easy to make it look like you're negotiating more than the other side when your first proposal was as far off the map as the NHL's was.

First offer was a carbon copy of the NBA's first offer last year.

BlueChip01 01-03-2013 05:40 PM

@mdandenault25: The nhl and nhlpa talks r dead for now...look for the players to disclaim...#lockout

Peter Puck 01-03-2013 05:44 PM

This is ridiculous. They don't need the players permission to disclaim. The union can make a disclaim of interest at any time whether the players like it or not. Yesterday's deadline was purely for show.

This is just so obviously a negotiating ploy.

du5566* 01-03-2013 05:49 PM

Fehr's last attempt to get a better deal. Both sides know losing another season is not an option. A deal will eventually get done, just be patient. I hate to admit it because I loathe the man but Fehr's knows what he is doing.

LeHab 01-03-2013 05:51 PM

So the reason why they had the first deadline was simply to put extra pressure on owners? Now that the owners called the bluff they want to have another deadline?

GKJ 01-03-2013 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by persh (Post 57078207)
So the reason why they had the first deadline was simply to put extra pressure on owners? Now that the owners called the bluff they want to have another deadline?

The owners' own deadline will come first

Pilky01 01-03-2013 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor (Post 57076027)
:facepalm:

In what universe to they believe the courts would not laugh them out? This is a bloody mockery.

In what universe are you (or anybody else) qualified to predict how this will play out in court when it has never happened before?

tantalum 01-03-2013 06:06 PM

Holding it over the owners heads hasn't really worked at all. From day 1 the owners have been after a 50:50 split, contract term limits, variance limits and a long term CBA. They are going to get all of those things DOI or not. Where the current status of negotiations are is a state the PA could have been at without losing any games. ANything that is fundamentally involved with the financial system is going to end up in the area everybody said the NHL was after with their very first offer....that 50:50 split, term limits around 7 years, limit the amount of variance (this one will likely be higher than they would have liked by 5 or 10%), a 8+ year term. THe players have gained nothing they couldn't have had if they negotiated off the 82 game saving offer way back in October (and well before that actually). The only accomplishment is missing 30+ games, damagining the game to hurt their near term future earnings and potentially threaten the season. For goodness sakes they are threatening DOI again to really nibble around the edges of things now that they've apparently caved on full linkage and no escrow limits.

no1b4me 01-03-2013 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by persh (Post 57078207)
So the reason why they had the first deadline was simply to put extra pressure on owners? Now that the owners called the bluff they want to have another deadline?

There was no reason to do it last night. They were still negotioating at the time.

haseoke39 01-03-2013 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tantalum (Post 57078657)
Holding it over the owners heads hasn't really worked at all. From day 1 the owners have been after a 50:50 split, contract term limits, variance limits and a long term CBA. They are going to get all of those things DOI or not. Where the current status of negotiations are is a state the PA could have been at without losing any games. ANything that is fundamentally involved with the financial system is going to end up in the area everybody said the NHL was after with their very first offer....that 50:50 split, term limits around 7 years, limit the amount of variance (this one will likely be higher than they would have liked by 5 or 10%), a 8+ year term. THe players have gained nothing they couldn't have had if they negotiated off the 82 game saving offer way back in October (and well before that actually). The only accomplishment is missing 30+ games, damagining the game to hurt their near term future earnings and potentially threaten the season. For goodness sakes they are threatening DOI again to really nibble around the edges of things now that they've apparently caved on full linkage and no escrow limits.

Well, they've already given up on 50-50. Throwing in $300M "off the books" effectively makes this more like 53-47. That's half the "make whole" money.

Bourne Endeavor 01-03-2013 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilky01 (Post 57078561)
In what universe are you (or anybody else) qualified to predict how this will play out in court when it has never happened before?

Where did I say I was? I'll wait. Or maybe I just posted my opinion. :amazed:

Snark aside, DOI cannot be used as a negotiation ploy by present legal standards. How does the PA go about justifying that is not precisely what they are doing?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:52 AM.

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.