HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Lockout Thread #4: Tentative agreement!

View Poll Results: Will there be a short nhl season this year
Yes 49 43.36%
No 64 56.64%
Voters: 113. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-15-2012, 12:46 PM
  #126
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,950
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by molsonmuscle360 View Post
That's why the NHL filed the suit. The crux of their suit is that the PA is not negotiating in good faith and that the decertification/disclaimer was their intention the entire time. Very smart on Batterman's part (that's who I'm guessing pulled this off, the guy is a brilliant lawyer) and it completely handcuffs the PA. If they file for a disclaimer before it goes to court and the court agrees with the NHL, the court may actually make a decision on the CBA from what I understand. They could legally force the players to either vote on the owners offer, or force them into legally binding arbitration. And at that point the owners would probably be open to it with a win in the courts in their back pocket, they know things would tilt their way heavily.
I only hope this is the way things go. At this point, I'd love to see the owners get their last proposal, with the make whole money gone. The NHLPA has completely lost any support I had for them what-so-ever with all of their "games". They deserve to get completely screwed, and hopefully they do. Fehr screwed the Expos and now he is screwing hockey fans everywhere. Unfortunately people either have short memories, or too young to realize how he destroyed the Expos. If I were an Expo fan back then, I would have boycotted the MLB just like so many of them did. Guess what, he is potentially doing it to the entire NHL now. A complete cancer where ever he has gone.

ponokanocker is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 01:25 PM
  #127
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meanashell11 View Post
I definitely understand what the antitrust arguement looks like. Basically the players will claim that the league operated as a monopoly and therefore limited their ability to get fair compensation. The league colluded to keep wages down through the use of the cap for example. They will seek compensation for this by asking for up to 3x their lost wages. Under the CBA the league is protected from these charges. Their threat is these damages and then free agency. However, their claim that the league is acting as a monopoly is severely damaged given that for a monopoly to exist there must not be any other similar opportunities to earn such an income for their services. Their leaving or threatening to leave to play in other leagues where they can get similar compensation undermines their position. Their loud mouthed trash talking may work fine on the ice, in a court of law it has made the league case significantly easier to make that the league is not a monopoly and therefore not subject to antitrust enforcement.
I don't think you do

The purpose of decertification isn't to bring foward a collusion fight.

The idea is that lacking a union to make a formal agreement with there is no ability by the league to use their reserve clauses under their anti-trust excemptions.

In otherwords the league can't independently decide to place a salary cap on teams without a negotatiated agreement to do so with the union.

If the players are allowed to decertify than there is no one need for a lockout or CBA negotiations because there is no party to negotiate with.

The league just moves forward without a draft, free agency rules, salary cap, etc..

The player lose pensions, benefit plans, minimum salary rules.

HotToddy is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 01:27 PM
  #128
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by molsonmuscle360 View Post
That's why the NHL filed the suit. The crux of their suit is that the PA is not negotiating in good faith and that the decertification/disclaimer was their intention the entire time. Very smart on Batterman's part (that's who I'm guessing pulled this off, the guy is a brilliant lawyer) and it completely handcuffs the PA. If they file for a disclaimer before it goes to court and the court agrees with the NHL, the court may actually make a decision on the CBA from what I understand. They could legally force the players to either vote on the owners offer, or force them into legally binding arbitration. And at that point the owners would probably be open to it with a win in the courts in their back pocket, they know things would tilt their way heavily.
I wouldn't really call it a brilliant move when he essentially took it from the NFL and NBA playbook.

The argument that the players are using decertification as a short term negotiation ploy is very valid though and one that the NFL argued and won successfully.

HotToddy is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 01:31 PM
  #129
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ponokanocker View Post
I only hope this is the way things go. At this point, I'd love to see the owners get their last proposal, with the make whole money gone. The NHLPA has completely lost any support I had for them what-so-ever with all of their "games". They deserve to get completely screwed, and hopefully they do. Fehr screwed the Expos and now he is screwing hockey fans everywhere. Unfortunately people either have short memories, or too young to realize how he destroyed the Expos. If I were an Expo fan back then, I would have boycotted the MLB just like so many of them did. Guess what, he is potentially doing it to the entire NHL now. A complete cancer where ever he has gone.
I find it amusing that the players are always blamed for the hiring of Fehr but owners get no blame for hiring Mr "Lockout playbook" Bob Batterman.

The man who was singularly credited with grinding the NHLPA lawyers into dust in 2004 and who's hiring by the NFL was considered an act of war by Demaurice Smih the NFLPA head.

Again I don't blame the NHL for utilizing a person who is obviously talented and knowlegable in empoying lockouts on behalf of owners but why are the players not allowed to do the same??

HotToddy is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 01:31 PM
  #130
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
I don't think you do

The purpose of decertification isn't to bring foward a collusion fight.

The idea is that lacking a union to make a formal agreement with there is no ability by the league to use their reserve clauses under their anti-trust excemptions.

In otherwords the league can't independently decide to place a salary cap on teams without a negotatiated agreement to do so with the union.

If the players are allowed to decertify than there is no one need for a lockout or CBA negotiations because there is no party to negotiate with.

The league just moves forward without a draft, free agency rules, salary cap, etc..

The player lose pensions, benefit plans, minimum salary rules.
It doesn't just work like that. First off, the players to get any of that need to file a lawsuit and have it proven that the lockout was illegal in the first place (which the NHL has basically preempted with their suit) and also at the same time they will be suing for lost wages x 3. With what we know of the league's health, that will cause anywhere from 4-12 teams to file for bankruptcy and basically toss the keys on the table.

Then yeah, they may start up again right away under a free market system. But, with the amount of teams that will end up dead because of it, NBC will have every right to cancel their TV deal completely and other sponsors will jump off the side of the ship. Owners will either have to start over completely, and the pay rate of all players will be miniscule compared to what it is now, OR it will try to turn itself into baseball, even though they don't have the fanbase to maintain itself like baseball does.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 01:36 PM
  #131
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
I wouldn't really call it a brilliant move when he essentially took it from the NFL and NBA playbook.

The argument that the players are using decertification as a short term negotiation ploy is very valid though and one that the NFL argued and won successfully.
Ask anyone in the sports or legal world about Batterman. They will tell you he is one of the best at what he does. He is the guy who actually works out the gameplans for the owners when they say what they want. When Daly said that they had ways of making sure they stuck to every letter of the law to avoid the PA's decertification suit to actually work, he meant that Batterman was keeping everyone on their toes, and telling them exactly what to do at all times to make sure they weren't doing anything that could be found to be negotiating in bad faith.

I even think that lopsided realignment last year was probably Battermans idea. They knew the players didn't want to negotiate then, but needed a way to prove it to the courts, so they tried something and just got shot down with no counter. And you are right about using the NBA and NFL playbook. But that's what any good lawyer does. Look back at what mistakes your counterparts have made in past cases, adjust accordingly and make sure to close off your loopholes.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 02:49 PM
  #132
402
#ualberta
 
402's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Egypt
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
So there appears to be some confusion, that's why i hate legal stuff there's always confusion
Here are some tweets.

@JSportsnet: NHLPA will begin voting tomorrow to give Exec Board authority to file a disclaimer of interest. Players will vote for 5 days via internet.
@JSportsnet: NHLPA Exec Board requires a positive vote of 2/3rds of the members to be able to act, and then has until Jan 2/13 to file notification.
@JSportsnet: If anyone is doubting the support the players are giving Donald Fehr, the results of this vote will be telling. #NHLPA

Yes they are all from john shannon and he may have made a mistake but assuming he didn't and what he said is correct.
if i recall one poster said only 1/3rds was required to go ahead with this but it says 2/3rds above also another poster said no vote was required at all don fehr could simply initiate the process on his own, i'm also doubting that now


Btw the poll here is so tight i must say i'm surprised to see "yes" winning so far

402 is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 04:31 PM
  #133
40oz
..........
 
40oz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,839
vCash: 500
Quote:
Jimmy Murphy ‏@MurphysLaw74
Decertification or disclaimer of interest could void all contracts in the NHL making all players UFA's. NHLPA better think hard before vote
After all these years of suck and rebuild... Wouldnt that just be swell?

40oz is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 04:36 PM
  #134
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 40oz View Post
After all these years of suck and rebuild... Wouldnt that just be swell?
People are reading too much into that. It's only if the NHLPA gets it to go all the way through the court system and wins. Which is very unlikely to happen. It's a scare tactic. They know playing without a CBA is pretty much impossible, because the league doesn't have to open back up. They can just pull a Hostess.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 04:49 PM
  #135
Meanashell11
Registered User
 
Meanashell11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: connecticut
Posts: 2,082
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
I don't think you do

The purpose of decertification isn't to bring foward a collusion fight.

The idea is that lacking a union to make a formal agreement with there is no ability by the league to use their reserve clauses under their anti-trust excemptions.

In otherwords the league can't independently decide to place a salary cap on teams without a negotatiated agreement to do so with the union.

If the players are allowed to decertify than there is no one need for a lockout or CBA negotiations because there is no party to negotiate with.

The league just moves forward without a draft, free agency rules, salary cap, etc..

The player lose pensions, benefit plans, minimum salary rules.
But they will need to litigate under the antitrust regulations to get any of these benefits. And as far as no one to negotiate with, fine, I hope the players enjoy spending their peak earning years in litigation. If they do not sue under the antitrust regulations and win, they get absolutely nothing. And the probability of them winning does not look very good given their conduct during the negotiations. The courts will rule in favour of the league and then the PA is really screwed. Their best hope is to vote against decertifying, then vote on a new leadership and get hem to reopen negotiations with the league. They are sooooo pooched it is hilarious.

Meanashell11 is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 05:31 PM
  #136
Blue And Orange
#KevinLoweMustGo
 
Blue And Orange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,243
vCash: 500
The way I see it. It could go either way. If it gets the owners to compromise and make a deal, then all the better. If not, RIP NHL.

Blue And Orange is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 05:34 PM
  #137
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue And Orange View Post
The way I see it. It could go either way. If it gets the owners to compromise and make a deal, then all the better. If not, RIP NHL.
If the players decide they are going to try to drive everything through in court, we are going to lose 2 seasons minimum, if not see the shutdown of the league. And noone wins in that situation.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 06:04 PM
  #138
Dorian2
The bag don't lie.
 
Dorian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,587
vCash: 50
I would think that some of the owners are really questioning themselves as to why they purchased and financed their respective teams, and if they are wiling to continue doing so. It'll be interesting to see how much change in ownership there is in the next couple of years.

Dorian2 is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 06:09 PM
  #139
402
#ualberta
 
402's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Egypt
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
Keep in mind players are voting to give the board the authority to disclaim interest, they are not voting to actually go ahead with this and the nhlpa has not indicated it will immediatly do it IF they get the required 2/3rds (67% of players) majority needed

402 is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 06:38 PM
  #140
Meanashell11
Registered User
 
Meanashell11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: connecticut
Posts: 2,082
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 402 View Post
Keep in mind players are voting to give the board the authority to disclaim interest, they are not voting to actually go ahead with this and the nhlpa has not indicated it will immediatly do it IF they get the required 2/3rds (67% of players) majority needed
This is an important point, why they actually gave them a vote when they did not need to. I think they are trying one or two things here. Either they are looking for some cover when it goes to court (actual vote holds more sway, makes it look better than just a simple negotiating gimmic) or some cover when they retreat and reopen negotiations. If they don't get the 2/3 they can argue the general body of players do not back this and then the can retry negotiations directly with the league while saving some face to get the last deal, maybe with some small movement their direction.

Meanashell11 is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 06:48 PM
  #141
Moonlapse Vertigo
Katz n' MacT BFFs
 
Moonlapse Vertigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by molsonmuscle360 View Post
If the players decide they are going to try to drive everything through in court, we are going to lose 2 seasons minimum, if not see the shutdown of the league. And noone wins in that situation.
If it gets to that point then I hope that guys like Mark Recchi start to yell a little louder. This generation of players needs to be reminded of the legacy that they're destroying.

Moonlapse Vertigo is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 09:24 PM
  #142
jbean
Registered User
 
jbean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,716
vCash: 500
The NHL has tarnished its image probably worse than ever before with this lockout. Could they go all the way, and essentially ruin the NHL as we know it? At the moment it looks like they are playing hardball, and there is room for a deal to be made. But I honestly think both sides are stupid and stubborn enough to ruin the NHL. If contracts are thrown out the window I will never watch NHL (or whatever league replaces it) hockey again.

Has that happened in any major sports league ever? It destroys the continuity of each franchise. It is disugsting to think about, let's hope they aren't that stupid.

jbean is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 09:25 PM
  #143
Groucho
Tier 1 Fan
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Displaced
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
I wouldn't really call it a brilliant move when he essentially took it from the NFL and NBA playbook.

The argument that the players are using decertification as a short term negotiation ploy is very valid though and one that the NFL argued and won successfully.

Batterman is one or the others lawyer as well though, so it's his playbook.
P&R represents all 4 pro leagues, and he is responsible for 2 and somebody else looks after the other 2.
This is all him.

Groucho is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 09:29 PM
  #144
Groucho
Tier 1 Fan
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Displaced
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlapse Vertigo View Post
If it gets to that point then I hope that guys like Mark Recchi start to yell a little louder. This generation of players needs to be reminded of the legacy that they're destroying.
100 years of history being collectively dumped on by Toews and co.
Amazing. You always hear these guys saying they grew up and dreamed of being in the NHL one day and now they're essentially flushing all the future kids dreams down the toilet.

Groucho is offline  
Old
12-15-2012, 09:38 PM
  #145
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,279
vCash: 500
Honestly, what I think Fehr is doing at this point is sending a message to the other leagues. He is willing to sacrifice the NHL so that the NBA and the NFL never think about trying a lockout again. If the NHL loses say 4 franchises out of this, that would make the NFL or NBA think twice about locking out the teams. Especially since their PA's will then have a playbook of their own to work off of.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 12:23 AM
  #146
Kestrel
Registered User
 
Kestrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 402 View Post
Keep in mind players are voting to give the board the authority to disclaim interest, they are not voting to actually go ahead with this and the nhlpa has not indicated it will immediatly do it IF they get the required 2/3rds (67% of players) majority needed
From everything I've read, they don't need 2/3 - they don't even need to vote. 2/3 majority is to decertify, but all a disclaimer of interest requires is for the union to state that it's so, and it's official. In other words, Fehr could fax in a letter saying "we no longer wish to represent the players" and it's done. The players can't walk away from the union without a vote, but the union can walk away from the players.

Kestrel is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 03:49 AM
  #147
402
#ualberta
 
402's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Egypt
Posts: 2,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
From everything I've read, they don't need 2/3 - they don't even need to vote. 2/3 majority is to decertify, but all a disclaimer of interest requires is for the union to state that it's so, and it's official. In other words, Fehr could fax in a letter saying "we no longer wish to represent the players" and it's done. The players can't walk away from the union without a vote, but the union can walk away from the players.
Here's an article from espn
http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/87...pa-sources-say
Here's an excerpt from that article

Quote:
Multiple sources confirmed to ESPNNewYork.com that the entire NHLPA membership will begin voting Sunday on whether to authorize the executive board the discretion to file a disclaimer of interest.
The voting, open to all 700-plus members of the NHLPA, will be done electronically over a five-day period. Should it pass -- a 2/3 majority vote is needed -- the NHLPA executive board has until Jan. 2, 2013 to file a disclaimer of interest.
I have also read that a disclaimer of interest can be done without a vote however that is not what the pa is doing, the pa is asking its membership for authorization to disclaim interest and a 2/3rds majority is apparently required to grant this authorization. While i have read in many places no vote is required i have also read, in many places, that a 2/3rds majority is required in this vote to grant authorization. The question is, if don fehr can do this without a vote why didn't he just do it he could have saved time and even got to court before the nhl, i think the reason for the vote is to show just how united they are maybe it's better in court as well, to show that players back the idea of disbanding the union and it wasn't just a ploy to gain leverage over the league

402 is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 05:33 AM
  #148
nexttothemoon
Eight Straight
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,864
vCash: 50
Honestly this is all a ****show now... all parties involved need flaming ******* bags dumped on their desks.

Pessimistic doesn't even describe the situation. I know I voted they'd have a short season...but that's just a fairy tale hope... I could easily see this all fireballing out of control and the league imploding/all contracts voided.

So long "BIG 5"... we didn't even get to know ya.

nexttothemoon is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 05:41 AM
  #149
Kestrel
Registered User
 
Kestrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 402 View Post
Here's an article from espn
http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/87...pa-sources-say
Here's an excerpt from that article



I have also read that a disclaimer of interest can be done without a vote however that is not what the pa is doing, the pa is asking its membership for authorization to disclaim interest and a 2/3rds majority is apparently required to grant this authorization. While i have read in many places no vote is required i have also read, in many places, that a 2/3rds majority is required in this vote to grant authorization. The question is, if don fehr can do this without a vote why didn't he just do it he could have saved time and even got to court before the nhl, i think the reason for the vote is to show just how united they are maybe it's better in court as well, to show that players back the idea of disbanding the union and it wasn't just a ploy to gain leverage over the league
I'm no expert, so I could be wrong - but everything I've read indicates to me that this is just writers and reporters mixing up decertification and a disclaimer of interest. I'm also reading that asking for a vote is simply a negotiations tactic - to indicate to an employer that the union is WILLING to give its disclaimer of interest, to scare the employer into bargaining, without actually obligating the union to disband. What I am also reading from previous NLRB judgement is that stating the disclaimer is not sufficient - the following behaviour from (ex) union members must be consistent with the union disbanding, or else they shall still legally be seen as a union, which seems to be what the NHL is getting at with their filing.

Now, I don't claim to actually know what I'm talking about - that's just some web-sleuthing on too little sleep, but it also seems consistent with what's being bandied about on the business board.

Kestrel is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 08:01 AM
  #150
LeafsRReady
Registered User
 
LeafsRReady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by molsonmuscle360 View Post
Honestly, what I think Fehr is doing at this point is sending a message to the other leagues. He is willing to sacrifice the NHL so that the NBA and the NFL never think about trying a lockout again. If the NHL loses say 4 franchises out of this, that would make the NFL or NBA think twice about locking out the teams. Especially since their PA's will then have a playbook of their own to work off of.
The economic landscape of the NHL is vastly different than the NFL and the NBA, so I'm not sure how much of a lesson it will teach the other 2 leagues. Also, you would have to think that at some point the players would figure out that Fehr is making the NHL the Titanic for the betterment of the other 2 leagues. IMO Fehr has pushed this just about as far as he can and he's now walking a tight rope with the players on one side and the NHL on the other.

LeafsRReady is offline  
Closed Thread

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 05:32 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.