View Single Post
12-15-2012, 11:17 AM
Ima Krejciist.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by EverettMike View Post
Smart pre-emptive move by the NHL filing in NY, which apparently is very friendly to their argument.

Word is the PA will file in California for the same reasons.

Most things I've read says the complaint with the NLRB is a joke because with the concessions the PA has made they have obviously not bargained in bad faith, plus it has been three months and the NHL can not argue that workers don't have the right to stop being represented.

The claim of disinterest route is faster, but is more of a question mark for the PA.

True decertification offers a better chance of winning, but at the cost of a much longer fight.
Both methods are to similar ends though are they not? The dissolution of the union so that players can launch anti-trust law suits? Decertification would be players saying they no longer wish to be represented by the union while a disclaimer is the union saying they no longer wish to represent the players.

Either way, both are simply a tactic at this point and both will take quite some time and still won't likely work out in their favor. The players would be best served by actually decertifying as it looks a lot less like a negotiating tactic (as you already alluded to), but that would require a commitment to that path and a willingness to live without those fat contracts for a couple of years.

No doubt the nhl launching their own lawsuit is the owners saying "yea, we don't think you have that commitment,so ok, we call your bluff."

Kaoz* is offline