View Single Post
Old
11-25-2004, 10:24 AM
  #22
djhn579
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes
You honestly think anybody would accept a contract like that?!



You can be guaranteed that this is exactly what the NHLPA would organize. You can also be assured that the other unions would be fully behind this action. Which begs the question.. how would they broadcast and run the season if TV crews, ushers, ticket takers, food service workers and any other union that helps run the operation of the arenas are not allowed to cross the picket lines.
b) With the existence of a CBA - only during freedom period

Art. 253, Labor Code. Duty to bargain collectively when there exists a collective bargaining agreement. -- When there is a collective bargaining agreement, the duty to bargain collectively shall also mean that neither party shall terminate nor modify such agreement during its lifetime. HOWEVER, EITHER PARTY CAN SERVE A WRITTEN NOTICE TO TERMINATE OR MODIFY THE AGREEMENT AT LEAST SIXTY (60) DAYS PRIOR TO ITS EXPIRATION DATE. It shall be the duty of both parties to keep the status quo and to continue in full force and effect the terms and conditions of the existing agreement during the 60-day period and/or until a new agreement is reached by the parties.


Violations of a CBA, except those which are gross in character, shall no longer be treated as unfair labor practice and shall be resolved as grievances under the CBA. Gross violations of the CBA shall mean flagrant and/or malicious refusal to comply with the economic provisions of the agreement (Art. 260, LC).

The “No Strike-No Lockout Clause” is not an infringement or undue restriction of the constitutional right to strike, because said clause is applicable only to ECONOMIC STRIKES, but not to ULP strikes. In other words, even during the effectivity of the CBA, the Union may still strike if the company commits ULP as enumerated in Article 248 of the Labor Code. (PHIL. METAL FOUNDRIES VS. CIR, 90 SCRA 135)


The last CBA had a no strike clause, and I can't see the NHL not insisting that a no strike clause be included in the next CBA. If that is the case, if the NHLPA did try to strike, it would be a "flagrant and/or malicious refusal to comply with the economic provisions of the agreement (Art. 260, LC)." I would assume that this would leave the NHLPA open to fines and/or possibly jail time for the union leaders.

Once they sign the new CBA, if they do not like the terms, they can't change them until the CBA expires. They will either have to sign the CBA or remain on strike until they are satisfied. They can't sign a CBA and go on strike again.

http://boracay.vasia.com/ablelaw/cba.htm

djhn579 is offline