The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
CHL Players Forming a Union? (Mod: Canadian Hockey League, aka junior)
Sportsnet's Spector on issues the CHLPA is raising.
For one, players have 18 months after leaving juniors to claim scholarships.
Second, players are limited to using scholarships to pay tuition at colleges/universities. Spector suggests that this could be expanded to include trade schools (say to learn welding, mechanic skills, etc.) or even allow the funds to be used to start a company (for aspiring entrepreneurs).
We need to get the lawyers or wannabe lawyers involved here. When I was 16 and working in a warehouse parttime, I qualified for the union, but due to my age I was unable to join. Most players in junior join at 15-16 and are gone at 19. Did forming a union rule change. Please don't bring up student unions in high school--that is something different
__________________
trying to fend off exwife number 2
45000/010113
GO SHARKS GO
We need to get the lawyers or wannabe lawyers involved here. When I was 16 and working in a warehouse parttime, I qualified for the union, but due to my age I was unable to join. Most players in junior join at 15-16 and are gone at 19. Did forming a union rule change. Please don't bring up student unions in high school--that is something different
In Canada, my sister had to pay union dues at age 17 for a summer job (she didn't get to collect any benefits though, because they had a 6 month minimum rule ). Not sure about 15-16, but can't see it being different. I think if you're 14 or younger, you need your parents' and principal's permission to get a job at all.
In Canada, my sister had to pay union dues at age 17 for a summer job (she didn't get to collect any benefits though, because they had a 6 month minimum rule ). Not sure about 15-16, but can't see it being different. I think if you're 14 or younger, you need your parents' and principal's permission to get a job at all.
The difference is it seems the fans would be paying union dues for the players i have never heard of this type of set up before so we have to see how well this works.
The difference is it seems the fans would be paying union dues for the players i have never heard of this type of set up before so we have to see how well this works.
Fans and hockey Canada would foot the bill.
They have to convince hockey canada to give up 50% of its profits from events. Good luck.
And while 1.50 a ticket may seem low, its adds up if you and the family go out as much as I do. And the 67's have great relations with schools who get a lot of free tickets, who pays?
and I cannot see players wanting to join. Whats the carrot?
CHLPA "We will get you much better benefits"
Player "Well, they will not just give it to us will they"
CHLPA " Then we will pressure them"
Player "How"
CHLPA "A strike is the only leverage we have"
Player "Ummm, its my draft year into the NHL, I need the scouts to see me"
The difference is it seems the fans would be paying union dues for the players i have never heard of this type of set up before so we have to see how well this works.
No, they can't do that. They can get fans to pay more and have those benefits go towards players, but fans can't directly pay dues. For example, you won't see money from a hypothetical ticket surcharge going to pay union salaries. I've never heard of something like that happening.
No, they can't do that. They can get fans to pay more and have those benefits go towards players, but fans can't directly pay dues. For example, you won't see money from a hypothetical ticket surcharge going to pay union salaries. I've never heard of something like that happening.
There is so much of this that is poorly thought out. I don't know if it's a hoax that took the originators by storm when word got out, so they went with it, or if it is legit. Much of what they've done so far looks like it was thrown together in no time flat, leading me to believe it's the former.
One of the reasons many of the 60 teams are well off financially? The players don't make a salary. Instead, players are paid a stipend of around $50 per week, an amount that can top out at $150 per week for overage (20 years old) players. Since teams can't just stack the roster with overage players, expenses are typically kept pretty low.
The players are not paid a salary, but those who don't move into the professional ranks once they are done in the CHL are eligible for scholarship packages to help them pay for college. It's a perk that was added to help CHL teams recruit players who would otherwise wait until they complete their high school or equivalent education and move on to an NCAA school to play while they get an education, often on scholarship.
As Bruce Peter points out in his piece on the CHLPA push, there are other flaws in these education packages.
To access the program, players have 18 months from the end of their career to start drawing from it. The amount of money provided is based on the costs of the university closest to the player's hometown. If they want to go to a more expensive university, they have to make up the added costs for it. If they want to try professional hockey, do mission work in Africa, or find themselves in India for longer than 18 months they lose their scholarship options.
That's not the only problem between CHL team owners and the players. When NHL 13 comes out on Sept. 11, you'll have the ability to play as any of the 60 CHL teams, which are complete with players. The players weren't compensated for the use of their names, something that strikes as completely unacceptable.
It's unfortunate that the NHL writers, who know absolutely nothing about junior hockey, feel the need to offer "expert" commentary. A lot of false information spread about by people who should either learn what they're talking about, or stay out of it altogether.
It's unfortunate that the NHL writers, who know absolutely nothing about junior hockey, feel the need to offer "expert" commentary. A lot of false information spread about by people who should either learn what they're talking about, or stay out of it altogether.
"Low expenses" is hilarious.
Doesn't matter if you're (the NHL and most writers) "right or wrong" as long as you're first.....then go back and edit it later!
The university expense isn't even that high, don't only like 30-40% of players actually take it up?
The moment they play in the AHL, they're not able to get that funding. So you go from the CHL to the AHL in hopes of furthering your career, and after a year or two realise you don't have what it takes, then is it fair that you're no longer able to get that funding/schooling?
At least that was my understanding.
And yes the monies are likely a little out of wack. These owners make a lot of money year in and out. Yes they have expenses (staff, building rent, travel, etc) but unlike the NHL, they're not paying 57% of their revenue in player costs. If you took the league average (with all benefits the players cost the team) I would guess that it's less than 30%.
The moment they play in the AHL, they're not able to get that funding. So you go from the CHL to the AHL in hopes of furthering your career, and after a year or two realise you don't have what it takes, then is it fair that you're no longer able to get that funding/schooling?
At least that was my understanding.
And yes the monies are likely a little out of wack. These owners make a lot of money year in and out. Yes they have expenses (staff, building rent, travel, etc) but unlike the NHL, they're not paying 57% of their revenue in player costs. If you took the league average (with all benefits the players cost the team) I would guess that it's less than 30%.
Are some teams making money no question is it as much as some seem to think i doubt it if you take the ohl you might have 5 maybe 6 teams doing real well so to say all owners make alot of money each year really is not true tickets don't cost alot plus many teams have tons of free tickets.
Mark Recchi part of WHL Kamloops Blazers ownership:
Quote:
"I can assure you my partners and I would not be involved in a CHL franchise if we didn't believe our first priority was to look after the best interest of our players," stated former CHL and NHL player Mark Recchi, "when you consider all of the improvements CHL teams have made to the player experience, from the quality of coaching and training facilities, to offering a fully guaranteed scholarship program, I can't imagine anyone could question our commitment to the players."
"I believe CHL Clubs have always acted in the best interests of the players and I am concerned how a new approach may impact on our ability to continue to do this," added Recchi.
When I was 16 and working in a warehouse parttime, I qualified for the union, but due to my age I was unable to join.
So you didnt qualify for the union?
Its a tough demographic to unionize - kids who are still thinking they are invincible, will live forever, and dont need anyones help.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark
Most players in junior join at 15-16 and are gone at 19. Did forming a union rule change. Please don't bring up student unions in high school--that is something different
Why not bring up a student union? They collect dues. They organize activities and info session for students including frosh weeks, orientation sessions, and stuff. Offer help and guidance getting day to day type stuff done. Do everything but collectively bargain wages. Isnt that somewhat what this would be?
What is Recchi afraid of. He claims they have done such a great job looking out for the players interests bu are terrified a union may get involved and by asking for fairness blow their profit model out of the water?
That's an argument against the forming of a union?
Its not really harder to imagine than a students union to me, and they didnt send universities over a cliff from their demands for longer bar hours and more study groups.
Its a tough demographic to unionize - kids who are still thinking they are invincible, will live forever, and dont need anyones help.
Why not bring up a student union? They collect dues. They organize activities and info session for students including frosh weeks, orientation sessions, and stuff. Offer help and guidance getting day to day type stuff done. Do everything but collectively bargain wages. Isnt that somewhat what this would be?
What is Recchi afraid of. He claims they have done such a great job looking out for the players interests bu are terrified a union may get involved and by asking for fairness blow their profit model out of the water?
That's an argument against the forming of a union?
Its not really harder to imagine than a students union to me, and they didnt send universities over a cliff from their demands for longer bar hours and more study groups.
1) A student union has no legal standing. Their rights are what the schools decide to give them, nothing more.
2) In order for the CHL to form a union, they would have to be declared employees of the CHL (as opposed to amateur athletes). If they are suddenly employees then CRA is going to need to audit quite a few players to get their backtaxes (including guys like Hall, Stamkos and Giroux). And a lot of what owners do has no paper trail, so there could be a lot of trouble on both sides.
). Not sure about 15-16, but can't see it being different. I think if you're 14 or younger, you need your parents' and principal's permission to get a job at all.
