NHLPA starts another 'disclaimer' vote
View Single Post
01-03-2013, 11:33 PM
Join Date: Dec 2011
Originally Posted by
It's very rare, in most big businesses at least, that the employees take home more profit than the business owners do. And until it actually truly gets to 50/50, the employees in this League have for at least a couple of decades now taken home a bigger % of the pie than the owners have. So Ok, it may not be called a "partnership" (though it should be), but these "employees" have really got a strong hold on the control of the buisness.
There aren't many businesses where labor is the product. There are also not many businesses that can legally restrict competitors from entering their markets.
The players made more 2 cbas ago, took a cut for linkage and revenues grew. Are there many businesses that increase revenues and ask their employees to take a cut? If this has all been an informal partnership, where's the pas cut of expansion fees? The distinction between partner and employee is not a semantic one, the owners can't treat the players as partners in order to get them to stabilize teams in crappy markets but as employees when it comes to things like cashing expansion checks. Was the pa consulted over the new TV deal ?
I feel that the use of quotes " partnership" is designed to intentionally confuse things, much like people who wanted to rebrand the owner initiated lockout as a " strike".
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by sandysan