HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Mirtle: NHLPA’s hard-liners hint at decertification after latest offer rejected

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-23-2012, 01:39 PM
  #326
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 14,487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aj8000 View Post
That you know of.
If there had been votes, Hamrlik wouldn't have been saying the players should be given a chance to vote on something.

billybudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:41 PM
  #327
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 31,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlapse Vertigo View Post
Hah! We've got a billionaire owner threatening to move his club from an extremely lucrative location because the city/province won't build a new arena for him. Believe me, I know that they're not doing this for philanthropic reasons but my point about the players still stands. There's no "right" side in this.

You didn't say that.

In battles over money, no one can be painted as innocent. As many have pointed out, the NHL isn't even claiming financial strife this time around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by billybudd View Post
If there had been votes, Hamrlik wouldn't have been saying the players should be given a chance to vote on something.

Nice attempt to hijack, but Fehr reports to the players-- the 30 reps actually can make that call.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:41 PM
  #328
aj8000
Registered User
 
aj8000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 731
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
And NHL owners are able to flout anti-trust laws because a PA exists. They're paying well under fair market value for the players. What more do they want? Right.... MORE money. Yet you try to paint them as being in this for philanthropic reasons.
I would have to disagree with this assessment. Well I agree that some of the best players may be underpaid based on the market, many of the non-stars are currently overpaid due to the cap floor.

aj8000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:42 PM
  #329
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,184
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
I think posters need to remember that this tactic is not the cure all that some think it is. The NFL actually won on appeal not the the NFLPA. The NBA/NBAPA never got to court since they settled before then. What would actually happen if the NHLPA went that route is somewhat unknown
yeah, but you have to keep in mind what the victory actually was - the court didn't say the NFLPA could not decertify or that it could not access anti-trust laws. it overturned the injunction that enjoined the lockout.

if the nhlpa decertified, it would very likely get the result it wanted re the anti-trust aspect...however, it would take a couple of years to get there, probably.

with that said...how eager would the nhl be to continue a lockout for a couple of years and litigate decertification issues?

decertification (if the players decided to aggressively pursue it and the league decided to aggressively oppose it) would basically turn into a murder/suicide by both.

UsernameWasTaken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:42 PM
  #330
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
I think posters need to remember that this tactic is not the cure all that some think it is. The NFL actually won on appeal not the the NFLPA. The NBA/NBAPA never got to court since they settled before then. What would actually happen if the NHLPA went that route is filed with as many risks for the players as the owners.
Absolutely agree.

This is really the only bullet the NHLPA has left in it's chamber. But they should have used it a while ago if they intended on using it to strike a deal in time to play this season. The NFLPA decertified March 11 and the Eighth Circuit didn't even hear arguments until April 6. The injunction was issued 45 days after the players disbanded.

Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:42 PM
  #331
aj8000
Registered User
 
aj8000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 731
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybudd View Post
If there had been votes, Hamrlik wouldn't have been saying the players should be given a chance to vote on something.
There has been mention of informal phone votes. I agree it is not perfect since it is not anonymous, but it is still a vote.

aj8000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:45 PM
  #332
pepty
Let's win it all
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 11,453
vCash: 395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
And NHL owners are able to flout anti-trust laws because a PA exists. They're paying well under fair market value for the players. What more do they want? Right.... MORE money. Yet you try to paint them as being in this for philanthropic reasons.
Below market value? What would be the market value outside the NHL?
Some players who are now paying for the Swiss leagues etc are getting maybe 20 cents on the dollar. That may be below market value..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I was wondering when you'd show up to put your own particular spin on this.

There's nothing odd about it. Have the owners voted on anything yet, or just received reports from their negotiating committee?

Please don't try this tactic again. The players are informed because they are in the negotiating room, and they can attend any meeting.
I guess most people here have their own spin on things, but I am not trying a tactic.. There was a call into Team 1200 about this ..Having some people in a meeting is not the same as having an internal anonymous vote.

pepty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:46 PM
  #333
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 36,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsernameWasTaken View Post
yeah, but you have to keep in mind what the victory actually was - the court didn't say the NFLPA could not decertify or that it could not access anti-trust laws. it overturned the injunction that enjoined the lockout.

if the nhlpa decertified, it would very likely get the result it wanted re the anti-trust aspect...however, it would take a couple of years to get there, probably.

with that said...how eager would the nhl be to continue a lockout for a couple of years and litigate decertification issues?

decertification (if the players decided to aggressively pursue it and the league decided to aggressively oppose it) would basically turn into a murder/suicide by both.
The NFL proved the NFLPA was using it as a negotiating tactic which....... is exactly what the NHLPA would be doing. And I said the results of the NHLPA going that route would be unknown. Its not the cure all that will force the NHL to the table some on here think it is. What part of that is wrong?

joshjull is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:54 PM
  #334
ti-vite
Registered User
 
ti-vite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sawchuk1971 View Post
ryan miller advocating decertification...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...article5578329
Could this quote end up hurting the NHLPA down the road (using decert as a negotiation tactic)?

ti-vite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:58 PM
  #335
Some Other Flame
Registered User
 
Some Other Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 973
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ti-vite View Post
Could this quote end up hurting the NHLPA down the road (using decert as a negotiation tactic)?
The PA can show they made a legitimate efforts to negotiate a deal and can provide the transcripts of a conference call where the majority of the players advocated negotiating over decertification. It was only after those attempts failed that they moved towards de-certifying.

The NFLPA launched into decertification immediately. I don't believe they spent a lot time bargaining with the NFL beforehand.

Some Other Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 01:59 PM
  #336
oiLowe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgree
Country: Canada
Posts: 691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Cute, but no. They'd have to get clearance from the Justice Department. You'd also have to convince 30 owners to throw their lot into one entity.
Wouldn't you only need a majority of vote from the owners? The big pocket owners would most certainly be out voted as they have been time and time again. I think this IS the likely scenario if the union were to decertify and I haven't seen a clear response yet as to why it wouldn't be the case.

oiLowe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:03 PM
  #337
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 38,579
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oiLowe View Post
Wouldn't you only need a majority of vote from the owners? The big pocket owners would most certainly be out voted as they have been time and time again. I think this IS the likely scenario if the union were to decertify and I haven't seen a clear response yet as to why it wouldn't be the case.
Because it breaks a whole host of antitrust laws, for starters.

Epsilon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:07 PM
  #338
oiLowe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgree
Country: Canada
Posts: 691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
Because it breaks a whole host of antitrust laws, for starters.
Why? The NHL as one business can do as they please, no? Nothing to stop other leagues from being started. It would purely be internal restrictions within the company that is the NHL.

oiLowe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:08 PM
  #339
Erik Estrada
Registered User
 
Erik Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
The NFL proved the NFLPA was using it as a negotiating tactic which....... is exactly what the NHLPA would be doing. And I said the results of the NHLPA going that route would be unknown. Its not the cure all that will force the NHL to the table some on here think it is. What part of that is wrong?
Aside from the fact the NFL lawsuit didn't get a decision on the merits... The NFLPA used a simple streamlined procedure to "decertify", a Disclaimer of Interest. The NFL argued it was a "sham" decertification used to negotiate.

We don't know if the NHL would use a Disclaimer of Interest or a Decertification proper. A Decertification proper is a much more onerous and irreversible process than a Disclaimer of Interest. The PA could not reconstitute without waiting a full 12 months.

How compelling this "sham" decertification argument is with the Courts will depend on the means of decertifying that the NHLPA uses.


Last edited by Erik Estrada: 11-23-2012 at 02:13 PM.
Erik Estrada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:09 PM
  #340
Halibut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottawah View Post
As for whether contracts are valid after, I would think they are still valid, but if the guarantees part is in the CBA as opposed to individual contracts, it may even be more worse for the players. The owners may be able to pick and choose what contracts they wish to keep.
Well the problem with contracts is that they all include a standard players contract (SPC) which is defined in the CBA and subject to it's rules. Without a CBA there really is no SPC so all of their contracts are technically invalid. A team and a player could decide to keep using all the terms of a SPC but if any player decided he didnt like those terms, like Sidney Crosby or Shea Weber or even Taylor Hall, I dont think it would take that long for a court to decide that those contracts are no longer valid.

Halibut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:09 PM
  #341
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 31,691
vCash: 500
@Freudian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Most important thing I learned from the paper is that calling what the NFL and NBA did a 'decertification' isn't quite accurate. Bobby M's latest claiming that a third of the PA would need to petition the NLRB, then wait two months for it to take effect is accurate, but a more immediate option is "Disclaim of Interest", which is what the other two PAs opted to do.

Anyone interested in this subject should read this paper.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:11 PM
  #342
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 31,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepty View Post
Below market value? What would be the market value outside the NHL?
Some players who are now paying for the Swiss leagues etc are getting maybe 20 cents on the dollar. That may be below market value..
For starters, 74% of HRR. Now remove the free agency restrictions and see what happens.


Quote:
I guess most people here have their own spin on things, but I am not trying a tactic.. There was a call into Team 1200 about this ..Having some people in a meeting is not the same as having an internal anonymous vote.
I cannot comment on their opinions, but the structure of the PA is such that the 30 reps wield a good deal of power on behalf of their players.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:14 PM
  #343
Mork
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,720
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Mork
Wouldn't it be sweet if the NHL does such a good job of busting the union that it ends up with no union and no CBA?

No draft; no cap; no restrictions on spending; and every player a free agent at the end of every contract?

I must say all of this is a bit beyond me, but the more I hear the more I like it.

The big teams outspend everyone else? Okay. I'm a Leafs fan.

Weak-market teams move or wither and die? It wouldn't bother me to see more Detroit and less Anaheim.

No revenue sharing? Leafs fans don't pay the freight for Nashville to beat the crap out of them every year? Check.

I think I like this.

Clear out the dead wood, and let's go!

Mork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:15 PM
  #344
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 36,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Estrada View Post
Aside from the fact the NFL lawsuit didn't get a decision on the merit... The NFLPA used a simple streamlined procedure to "decertify", a Disclaimer of Interest. The NFL argued it was a "sham" decertification used to negotiate.

We don't know if the NHL would use a Disclaimer of Interest or a Decertification proper. A Decertification proper is a much more onerous and irreversible process than a Disclaimer of Interest. The PA could not reconstitute without waiting a full 12 months.

How compelling this "sham" decertification argument is with the Courts will depend on the means of decertifying that the NHLPA uses.
My point was it will drag the process out further and will not force the NHL to the table. Something that some think is what will take place if the NHLPA moves to decertify. Each of your post furthers that point. I'm not saying the NHLPA won't be allowed to decertify by the courts.

joshjull is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:15 PM
  #345
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 17,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
And NHL owners are able to flout anti-trust laws because a PA exists. They're paying well under fair market value for the players. What more do they want? Right.... MORE money. Yet you try to paint them as being in this for philanthropic reasons.
Actually as a complete group the players are overpaid, and as individual players many more are overpaid than are underpaid.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:15 PM
  #346
Chileiceman
Registered User
 
Chileiceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Chile
Posts: 9,021
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post




I cannot comment on their opinions, but the structure of the PA is such that the 30 reps wield a good deal of power on behalf of their players.
And unfortunately for us most of those player reps are probably part of the more militant group. Meaning they do as Fehr says

Chileiceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:16 PM
  #347
JoemAvs
Registered User
 
JoemAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,204
vCash: 500
I think that decertification would be a bad idea for all parties involved.
For the following reasons:
1.
Season 2012/2013 is most likely gone: There are only 8-10 weeks left until this mess has to be solved. If they don't do it in this timespan, the season is gone. Getting lawyers involved to poison the relationship between the parties even further will not increase those chances.
A deal will be made if one of the parties blinks at the last second. Law suits which are scheduled way ahead in the future don't have an immediate effect on this. Is it a threat? Yeah, but not an imminent one

2. Anti-trust lawsuits:
Prepare for a crapload of different lawsuits to be filed.
Worst case scenario for the owners there are treble damages for collusion or other unlawful violations. If the owners lose those, they are screwed.
But you will see a lot of franchises folding, even if they don't have to pay those damages. The NHL is a gate driven league. They don't have the TV money and the revenue sharing the MLB has.
Would you as a fan of lets say the Tampa Bay Lightning show up to games even if there is noway in hell your team ever makes the playoffs in 2 years straight?
If the likes of Stamkos or Hedman bolt for way more money to TOR or NYR the first chance they get? ( if contracts are deemed void with no CBA that would be right now)

The MLB only works because of their popularity as a whole and their ridicuolus TV deal which lets bottom feeders make a profit thanks to revenue sharing despite having a half empty stadium almost every game.

There is not enough money to quiet the small market owners in the NHL that way. That means we lose probably at least 10 franchises.
Overall revenue goes down. Even if you move teams, it would not help. Could Quebec pay wages like Toronto? Doubt it. Especially when Toronto can just fix their mistakes by shelling out more money without being hindered by the current CBA mechanism (cap,RFA, even the draft)
Even Canadian fans would lose interest after a few years if their team has no shot at competing.

And there might not even be a draft anylonger. So those franchises could not even sell hope to their fan base for the few years those young stars could be kept.

There is just no upside in this for anyone.

3. Success rate of those law suits.
It will be very hard for the NHLPA to prove that the NHL negotiated in bad faith. Especially if you take a look at the recent deals struck in the NBA and NFL.
And Ryan Miller basically just admitted that this whole decertification would be used as a negotiation tactic.
It does not help that the other leagues never even came close to going through with those lawsuits after decertification.
All in all it would be a court battle going on for multiple years which you might end up losing anyway.
And if you win, you might be screwed too. (see 2.)

4. Fans
What both sides seem to have forgotten is that the league is nothing without his (paying) fans. Ok maybe one should call them customers. Isn't the customer the King?
If we lose several years in a courtbattle, hockey in the US might just be done. Relegated to sub-MLS level. Even if the players somehow end up with 74 % ( like pre cap) of the revenue, they lose if overall revenue is drastically decreased. Does anyone really think that fans would wait through several years of court battle and come back as if it did not happen?
And that is disregarding of all the money lost during those years in court.

5. Solution.
It is in the best interest of both parties that the NHL as a whole makes as much money as possible. If they are done sabotaging themselves, they should get their heads out of their butts and work on making the league profitable. There are too many franchises losing money. So the biggest concession the PA would want from the league is on the revenue sharing. That should be their biggest negotiation issue.
The players are strangely very shortsighted on some points and not at all on others. They are willing to sacrifice a lot of money right now, but they are not willing to invest in those future CBA negotiations.
With heavy revenue sharing and increasing league profits
( because of the 50-50 split), there is a good chance that they are in the drivers seat in 5 years when the next negotiation round will take place. A viable league making tons of money certainly can't afford a lockout, right? And with a possible new commissioner things may improve drastically for the players.
And for right now? They really would not lose that much other than maybe a little pride...

JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:16 PM
  #348
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 31,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aj8000 View Post
I would have to disagree with this assessment. Well I agree that some of the best players may be underpaid based on the market, many of the non-stars are currently overpaid due to the cap floor.
Get rid of the cap range.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ti-vite View Post
Could this quote end up hurting the NHLPA down the road (using decert as a negotiation tactic)?
No. Miller is commenting that there is nothing left to gain, and only how much they lose. It's not like they have any other option, capitulate or decertify.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oiLowe View Post
Wouldn't you only need a majority of vote from the owners? The big pocket owners would most certainly be out voted as they have been time and time again. I think this IS the likely scenario if the union were to decertify and I haven't seen a clear response yet as to why it wouldn't be the case.
Teams are individually owned. You can't simply vote to take someone's team away. First, you'd need to rewrite the constitution, and if you could force an owner to divest himself to convert his ownership, you would have to give him fair market value. It may be moot as you'd have to file for approval of the takeover. Justice Dept would investigate to make sure this wasn't afoul of anti-trust laws as well. The teams are considered competitors after all.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:16 PM
  #349
jimmycrackcorn
HFBoards Sponsor
 
jimmycrackcorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,524
vCash: 500
You gotta wonder what all the players - except the first-liners - think of this. They stand to lose a ton of money if Fehr goes down this road.

And for what?

I see an insurrection within the NHLPA on the horizon.

Do these guys near the end of their careers making inflated salaries (i.e. Ron Hainsey) really want to forego the guaranteed $$$ at this point in their careers? If so, they ain't gonna be getting any (fill in the blank) at home for a very long time...

jimmycrackcorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:17 PM
  #350
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 31,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chileiceman View Post
And unfortunately for us most of those player reps are probably part of the more militant group. Meaning they do as Fehr says

Fehr does as they say.

Fugu 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 12:03 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.