View Single Post
11-26-2004, 02:15 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,747
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
The fact that one party terminated the CBA gives either party the right to initiate the work stoppage. They aren't tied to a date.

If the players told the NHL that they were willing to negotiate a salary-revenue relationship, the owners would probably lift the lockout right now while the parties argued about definitions and shares. If the negotiations fell apart at some point thereafter, the lockout could be renewed.

But wouldn't they need to have some kind of new agreement in writing stating that they are going to operate under certain terms of the previous CBA pending concluding negotiations of a new CBA that includes X, and that the NHL has the right to re-impose the lockout if negotiations break down?

On top of that, I read somewhere that the last lockout was lifted in a similar manner and that after play resumed, the NHLPA was insissting on adding various clauses that were not previously agreed to. Those clauses got into the CBA because the owners did not want to shutdown the season again. This time they have stated that they will have a full CBA approved before they lift the lockout.

djhn579 is offline