HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Other Leagues > Canadian Junior Hockey > OHL
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

CHL Responds to court order

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-10-2017, 08:38 PM
  #326
EasternOntario Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohloutsider View Post
Agree that it has no immediate impact to other leagues but the potential is there - unions never stop at one - always looking for the next group to organize but that is in the future.
What I did read through a couple of days ago is the eligible age for employment (Ontario) - I was curious how the suit would consider players who enter the league at 15 - how would they fit into the wage question - Labour laws define a person must be 18 to work construction, 16 to work in a factory and can be employed at 14 in the service industry - so I will assume hockey falls under the service industry? Lawyers will have fun dragging this one out for years. This will lead to some ground breaking decisions I'm sure, stay tuned.
It is very interesting to follow---but unfortunately the only two winners will probably be legal council on both sides.

EasternOntario Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2017, 09:31 PM
  #327
EvenSteven
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EasternOntario Fan View Post
I am not sure if you are familiar with the entire process, but having been a Union Organizer for fifteen years, it is without a doubt a lot harder to bring a Union in than to get rid of them. Agreed, there are only certain times open to de-certify, but if thats what employees want it is very simple to do during the open period.

Employees that may want to unionize and sign a card, face direct and non direct threats from most companies and are usually too scared to sign a card to get to a vote. To de-certify all you need to do is fill out a form, wait for open period, and if the majority vote no--pooof,union gone.
Lol!! Spoken like a true union man. I worked in an auto parts shop in the
Waterloo region years ago that was non-union but then certified. You are right when you say employees could face "direct and non-direct threats from most companies". In our situation, there were never any direct threats from the company, but the actions of the employees who were trying to get the workforce certified, most certainly went about their business in a highly covert manner for fear of reprisals from the company. Ever likely, such organizers could have faced at worst, termination of employment.

However, de-certifying is a whole different animal. Union leaders, many holding cushy positions within the union that they wouldn't hold otherwise had there been no union would be life and death to do anything to quash any movement to de-certify. I've seen guys over the years bring up de-certification and be pressured in a huge way by these leaders and their minions on the floor to the point where it wouldn't be out of the question to see everything up to and including physical harm to their person and their property.

There's been more than one guy threatened, get slapped around, sometimes right on the shop floor (nobody saw anything), or find the tires slashed off his car or even the lug nuts loosened, all in an effort to get that person to cease talk of de-certification and to send a message to all who may want to start a de-certification movement what could happen if they do. Two different guys got punched out by our plant chair at the time for talking de-certification - one at the local union hall and one at the company golf tournament. Sort of makes the next guy who dares step up to organize a de-certification to rethink his actions.

Of course some may roll theirs eyes at this and think I'm exaggerating this big time but I'm here to tell you I am not.

So sure, it's hard to certify, but IMO, much harder to get a de-certification to the voting stage.

EvenSteven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-10-2017, 09:47 PM
  #328
EasternOntario Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvenSteven View Post
Lol!! Spoken like a true union man. I worked in an auto parts shop in the
Waterloo region years ago that was non-union but then certified. You are right when you say employees could face "direct and non-direct threats from most companies". In our situation, there were never any direct threats from the company, but the actions of the employees who were trying to get the workforce certified, most certainly went about their business in a highly covert manner for fear of reprisals from the company. Ever likely, such organizers could have faced at worst, termination of employment.

However, de-certifying is a whole different animal. Union leaders, many holding cushy positions within the union that they wouldn't hold otherwise had there been no union would be life and death to do anything to quash any movement to de-certify. I've seen guys over the years bring up de-certification and be pressured in a huge way by these leaders and their minions on the floor to the point where it wouldn't be out of the question to see everything up to and including physical harm to their person and their property.

There's been more than one guy threatened, get slapped around, sometimes right on the shop floor (nobody saw anything), or find the tires slashed off his car or even the lug nuts loosened, all in an effort to get that person to cease talk of de-certification and to send a message to all who may want to start a de-certification movement what could happen if they do. Two different guys got punched out by our plant chair at the time for talking de-certification - one at the local union hall and one at the company golf tournament. Sort of makes the next guy who dares step up to organize a de-certification to rethink his actions.

Of course some may roll theirs eyes at this and think I'm exaggerating this big time but I'm here to tell you I am not.

So sure, it's hard to certify, but IMO, much harder to get a de-certification to the voting stage.
Sounds like the 1950's all over again.

EasternOntario Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2017, 06:23 AM
  #329
Otto
Registered User
 
Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EasternOntario Fan View Post
I am not sure if you are familiar with the entire process, but having been a Union Organizer for fifteen years, it is without a doubt a lot harder to bring a Union in than to get rid of them. Agreed, there are only certain times open to de-certify, but if thats what employees want it is very simple to do during the open period.

Employees that may want to unionize and sign a card, face direct and non direct threats from most companies and are usually too scared to sign a card to get to a vote. To de-certify all you need to do is fill out a form, wait for open period, and if the majority vote no--pooof,union gone.
Having worked on the other side it's easy to understand why our opinions differ. I think it's best for everyone if we just agree to disagree on this, lest the thread be hijacked.

Otto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2017, 06:26 AM
  #330
Otto
Registered User
 
Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EasternOntario Fan View Post
Sounds like the 1950's all over again.
It's not as uncommon as you think

Otto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2017, 07:39 AM
  #331
EasternOntario Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
Having worked on the other side it's easy to understand why our opinions differ. I think it's best for everyone if we just agree to disagree on this, lest the thread be hijacked.
We can certainly agree to disagree, and for the record I don't think there is a place in Junior hockey for a union. Having many friends of my sons go that route, I think they have it pretty good with the education packages and everything else they receive. Didn't mean to hijack thread, was just stating my opinion that its not hard to de-certify.

EasternOntario Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2017, 09:26 AM
  #332
OMG67
Registered User
 
OMG67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EasternOntario Fan View Post
We can certainly agree to disagree, and for the record I don't think there is a place in Junior hockey for a union. Having many friends of my sons go that route, I think they have it pretty good with the education packages and everything else they receive. Didn't mean to hijack thread, was just stating my opinion that its not hard to de-certify.
I think both of you essentially agree. EOF makes a valid point that in theory it is easy to de-certify because the steps required are very simple and don't require much effort. Otto speaks more from a practical POV where although the steps are simple, once you bring in the emotion of humans, it isn't easy to get the signatures because of threats and intimidation.

With the advancement of Labour laws, unions are less needed now and as long as the labour laws continue to evolve and keep up with the needs of the workforce, they should become less and less relevant.

OMG67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2017, 11:47 AM
  #333
ETA 2000 Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 77
vCash: 500
Certify/decertify: Is everyone assuming the current players will vote for a union?

Remember these lawsuits were initiated by a miniscule number of disgruntled ex-players who bear personal vendettas against ownership (i.e. Sam Berg vs. Bill Burke) and it's extremely unlikely they represent the majority, if any, of current CHL players. Not to mention their claim is for minimum wage and not to form a player's union.

If current players were given the option of the status quo (educational packages, in many cases private school tuition, monthly stipend, equipment, medical/dental/chiropractic/massage and many, many other expenses) vs. minimum wage but you must share in expenses, I'm betting the vast majority would prefer the status quo (certainly their parents would!).

Teenagers who work at McDonalds don't get private school tuition, scholarships, $1,000 skates and dozens of $400 sticks for example.

ETA 2000 Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2017, 12:47 PM
  #334
EasternOntario Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETA 2000 Fan View Post
Certify/decertify: Is everyone assuming the current players will vote for a union?

Remember these lawsuits were initiated by a miniscule number of disgruntled ex-players who bear personal vendettas against ownership (i.e. Sam Berg vs. Bill Burke) and it's extremely unlikely they represent the majority, if any, of current CHL players. Not to mention their claim is for minimum wage and not to form a player's union.

If current players were given the option of the status quo (educational packages, in many cases private school tuition, monthly stipend, equipment, medical/dental/chiropractic/massage and many, many other expenses) vs. minimum wage but you must share in expenses, I'm betting the vast majority would prefer the status quo (certainly their parents would!).

Teenagers who work at McDonalds don't get private school tuition, scholarships, $1,000 skates and dozens of $400 sticks for example.
Coming from someone who works for a union, I actually have the opinion that they should not certify. It would effect most for 3-4 years only, and in my opinion would dramatically change the OHL, probably for the worse. The problem is that if the union go in selling the world to the players, they are young adults and maybe truly believe they would have it much better. As stated many times, its only my opinion but I believe they actually have it pretty good. With Canadian Universities offering scholarships, most are actually being paid to go to school---- a very good option if you are not being paid to play in the AHL, ECHL or maybe Europe.

EasternOntario Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2017, 12:23 PM
  #335
BadgerBruce
Registered User
 
BadgerBruce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EasternOntario Fan View Post
Coming from someone who works for a union, I actually have the opinion that they should not certify. It would effect most for 3-4 years only, and in my opinion would dramatically change the OHL, probably for the worse. The problem is that if the union go in selling the world to the players, they are young adults and maybe truly believe they would have it much better. As stated many times, its only my opinion but I believe they actually have it pretty good. With Canadian Universities offering scholarships, most are actually being paid to go to school---- a very good option if you are not being paid to play in the AHL, ECHL or maybe Europe.
There are many sound reasons to oppose the unionization of CHL players, but "it would effect most for 3-4 years only" isn't one of them.

The average NFLer has a career of 2.66 years (
https://www.si.com/nfl/2016/03/01/nf...-data-analysis) and that isn't an age-restricted league like the CHL.

In the NHL, over 50% of all players play less than 100 games during their career. 5% play only one game and just 4% make 1000 games.

http://www.quanthockey.com/Distribut...erLengthGP.php

Professional athletes are, almost by definition, precarious workers and I cannot think of a single players association in North America that did not come into being because of a powerful desire to improve the lot of the most vulnerable athletes.

One could even argue that collectively bargained terms and conditions of employment are far more important to precarious workers than all others. Certainly that's the stance most public sector unions take today when they undertake organizing campaigns in workplaces dominated by part-time employees (eg, LCBO in Ontario, where 84% of non-management employees are non full-time).

BadgerBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2017, 06:56 PM
  #336
EasternOntario Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadgerBruce View Post
There are many sound reasons to oppose the unionization of CHL players, but "it would effect most for 3-4 years only" isn't one of them.

The average NFLer has a career of 2.66 years (
https://www.si.com/nfl/2016/03/01/nf...-data-analysis) and that isn't an age-restricted league like the CHL.

In the NHL, over 50% of all players play less than 100 games during their career. 5% play only one game and just 4% make 1000 games.

http://www.quanthockey.com/Distribut...erLengthGP.php

Professional athletes are, almost by definition, precarious workers and I cannot think of a single players association in North America that did not come into being because of a powerful desire to improve the lot of the most vulnerable athletes.

One could even argue that collectively bargained terms and conditions of employment are far more important to precarious workers than all others. Certainly that's the stance most public sector unions take today when they undertake organizing campaigns in workplaces dominated by part-time employees (eg, LCBO in Ontario, where 84% of non-management employees are non full-time).
I get your point, but I believe being a member for a couple years as a 17-19 year old is a little bit different. There is tremendous upside if you can play in NHL and NFL, no matter how many games it might be life changing money-----to me there is no tremendous upside to someone who is limited in how long they can be in the league as teenagers. Just my opinion.

EasternOntario Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2017, 03:48 AM
  #337
Otto
Registered User
 
Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETA 2000 Fan View Post
Certify/decertify: Is everyone assuming the current players will vote for a union?
No, but the possibility is out there that the union may be thrust upon them. If the CHLPA can make a case that the league interfered in their recruitment efforts it doesn't need to go to a vote

Otto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2017, 06:40 AM
  #338
ETA 2000 Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 77
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
No, but the possibility is out there that the union may be thrust upon them. If the CHLPA can make a case that the league interfered in their recruitment efforts it doesn't need to go to a vote
Not a union expert by a long shot but is there no ability to "opt out" if a union is formed?

ETA 2000 Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2017, 10:57 AM
  #339
Otto
Registered User
 
Otto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETA 2000 Fan View Post
Not a union expert by a long shot but is there no ability to "opt out" if a union is formed?
I don't believe there is in Ontario. Some jurisdictions in the USA have this I believe, but it's very controversial.

Otto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2017, 01:16 PM
  #340
ohloutsider
Registered User
 
ohloutsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Rock & Hardplace
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
I don't believe there is in Ontario. Some jurisdictions in the USA have this I believe, but it's very controversial.
Actually a friend of mine has "opted" out ( Ontario) it is a bit of a process but he did it under religious grounds - he still has to pay out his union dues but they go to his church - he just has to make sure that is documented as well - If his local union goes on strike he is not allowed to cross the picket line but must stay home until the issue is settled. Company must treat him and pay him the same as the other workers - having said this he did this 30 years ago so maybe you can't do this anymore but in the past you could.

ohloutsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2017, 02:25 PM
  #341
WolvesAndWings
Registered User
 
WolvesAndWings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Country: Canada
Posts: 193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETA 2000 Fan View Post
Not a union expert by a long shot but is there no ability to "opt out" if a union is formed?
There technically isn't anything in legislation stopping one from opting out, but the vast majority of collective agreements, including every single one of them I've read (And I'm a public sector HR employee, so I've read quite a few), has language prohibiting any employees to opt out/to not be in the union if their position is identified as a bargaining unit position.

WolvesAndWings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-17-2017, 02:53 PM
  #342
OMG67
Registered User
 
OMG67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WolvesAndWings View Post
There technically isn't anything in legislation stopping one from opting out, but the vast majority of collective agreements, including every single one of them I've read (And I'm a public sector HR employee, so I've read quite a few), has language prohibiting any employees to opt out/to not be in the union if their position is identified as a bargaining unit position.
What you said at the very end is the key. It depends on whether the position itself was a bargaining unit. The Union bargains for positions as well as compensation; therefore, the position is a UNION POSITION. You cannot hold the position without being in the union.

Trades are some of the exceptions. You don't need to necessarily be part of a Uniont o perform work but I know there are contracts in place for only Union workers to be on the job site so there are restrictions there as well.

OMG67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:51 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.