View Single Post
11-26-2004, 03:00 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 508
vCash: 500
The Lawyers would have a field day with this , I'm sure

Originally Posted by I in the Eye
It is clear that the NHL could legally lockout the players after the expiration date... It is my understanding that instead of a lockout, it could have been 'business as usual' while both sides continue negotiations...
According to one section of the old CBA quoted by djhn579, the NHL had to give 120 days notice prior to September 15th, 2004 ,or else the CBA would have been in effect for another full calendar year. The NHL could only lock out the players on September 15th....not September 16th , not November 26th, not December 31st....not again until September 15th, 2005. (the players did not give strike notice 120 days prior to September 15th, 2004. Does that mean if the lockout is "lifted", they would not be able to declare a strike until September 15th,2005)?????

"This Agreement is effective retroactive to September 16, 1993, and shall remain in full force and effect until midnight on the 15th day of September, 2004, and shall remain in effect from year to year thereafter unless and until either party shall furnish the other a written notice of termination of this Agreement 120 days prior to the 15th day of September, 2004 or not less than a like period in any year thereafter.
3.2. Binding Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the NHL, the Clubs, the NHLPA and all the players covered by this Agreement and their successors or assigns."

GabbyDugan is offline