View Single Post
Old
11-13-2012, 11:52 AM
  #84
Leafsman
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by egd27 View Post
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.
What labour laws??

There's a big difference between a player deciding to play in the NHL and an owner deciding to buy a team. The main difference is no matter what that player will get paid and never lose out and never have to share in the risk. He sits back and reaps the reward in those cities while that owner shells out of his own pocket. You never hear the players complaining about those teams being there, because it created more jobs for them. Donald Fehr is widely reported as revenue sharing being one of his top issues meaning they know there is a problem they just don;t want to help fix it and feel the other teams should. The players reap every reward and share no negative reprecussions or risks dealt with owning or running an NHL franchise.


With owners competing to sign players, players will always be assured to be well-compensated which is why having a union is redundant. The CBA is for a large part protection for the owners from each other. What is wrong with containing salaries when revenues keep growing. Some owners have been losing out for quite awhile yet kept their team going. Why is it not time for them to cap the salary growth momentarily so that they too can share in the increased revenue??? All the owners want is to make money like the players make money. Their demands are far from unreasonable and will go to making this a more entertaining league. The players need to accept the 50/50 and some of the contract limits and move on. It is for the good of everyone!

Leafsman is offline