Lockout Thread: I told myself I wouldn't do this| Part IV
View Single Post
11-13-2012, 11:27 AM
Join Date: Jul 2011
Originally Posted by
No because it is impossible to know.
I never mentioned anything about abolishing the CBA. Only that the NHLPA should take more of a monitoring role instead of a negotiating role.
But a 50/50 split in an increasing revenue is hardly something that needs to be squabbled over.
Also if a business wants to change their own contracting policies who are the employees to tell them different.
What it all boils down to is the player had every right to choose to play in the NHL or not.
They chose to play and it is crazy that they know fight against a league trying to rectify problems. It is no secret that there are a number of teams in severe financial hardship and obvious to everyone that something has to be done.
The employees, in this case, are exercising their rights as union members under the labor laws established. They are entitled to bargain for the best deal they can get as much as the owners are entitled to bargain for their best deal.
You are correct that each player had a choice to play in the NHL or not, however, you neglect to mention that there are businessmen that had every right to not purchase teams in markets like, Nashville, Phoenix, Miami, Columbus, etc.
They also complete against each other for the ability to sign players to play on their teams, which resulted in the escalation of salaries in the first place.
I don't really care who "wins" in this negotiation, but I don't agree that the ills of the NHL rest solely on one side.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by egd27