View Single Post
11-30-2012, 01:39 PM
Global Moderator
tarheelhockey's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 52,738
vCash: 1020
Originally Posted by HockeyCrazed101 View Post
If the PA refuses to do this, couldn't the league use this in court to counter a disclaimer of interest or decertification? It wouldn't prevent the players from filing suits but it could help in their favour of getting a ruling that the lockout will be considered legal even if the PA disbands (though precendence set by the NFL and NBA would suggest that the NHL would get this ruling anyway). A refusal would lend to the league's argument that disclaimer of interest/decertification is just a bargaining tactic used to threaten the league through legal means, afterall, if the players didn't want to want to talk without their union head in the room, why are they dissolving the union all together and giving up that right to be represented collectively by that same guy?
This is an excellent point that was kind of lost in the shuffle this morning.

The PA has a catch-22 to deal with if they intend to argue in court that they don't want to be represented by Fehr anymore.

tarheelhockey is online now