NHL and NHLPA Meeting Dec. 9th

[pittengineer]

Not sure anyone has posted this yet, but both sides are meeting next week. Bob Goodenow invited the NHL to meet next week in Toronto and Daley and the NHL have accepted.

LOCK EM' IN A ROOM AND LETS GET THIS DONE!!!!!!

Click to read more...

 

[wilka91*]

No Way!

Let European Stars Play In Europe For A Year. European Fans Deserve To See Them Too.

 

[Vic Rattlehead*]

No Way!

Let European Stars Play In Europe For A Year. European Fans Deserve To See Them Too.

You have your own league.

I NEED NHL!

 

[GKJ]

I think the players are ready to give up a little more here. I don't think we'll see happen what we all hope for, but something will get done.


Even if they discuss the luxury tax/salary cap and they can't get anything done there they should at least get everything down that they agree or are close on

 

[Tuggy]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=106699

Quote from Saskin:

"We've set aside a couple of days and are obviously prepared to go as long as it takes to get a new agreement," Ted Saskin, senior director of the NHLPA, said earlier Thursday in Toronto.

I doubt we can take very much from that but at least it's some ray of hope. We need to believe

 

[Lobstertainment]

Goodenow: Allright guys the deal is that the Owners will give us a keg of beer before every meeting as long as we give up our Dental Plan

Linden: SO LONG DENTAL PLAN!

>_>

you know what to do.

 

[GKJ]

Goodenow: Allright guys the deal is that the Owners will give us a keg of beer before every meeting as long as we give up our Dental Plan

Linden: SO LONG DENTAL PLAN!

>_>

you know what to do.

Wrong forum.

 

[SENSible1*]

Negotiating is a very unique process that requires more posturing and rhetoric than substance. Both sides knew that the union was going to make significant concessions before this was over and have both their ideal and worst case bottom line prepared.

The PA's problem is that if they put too much on the table now they might encourage the owners to sense the blood in the water and go for the kill instead of just the win, so they'll sweeten the pot, but leave significant morsels still in their pockets.

It really comes down to what the owners want out of this. They hold the far better hand. It would cost them to crush the union, and could work against their long-term interest. Unfortunately for the players, the owners may examine the NFL and NBA scenario's and decide that it is in their best interest to crush the union like the NFL did, as opposed to only wounding the union like the NBA did. The NFLPA has been easy to deal with ever since they were crushed and the NBAPA is making noises about future labour strife.

If the owners get a VERY favourable deal and nail it down for a significant length of time, they may just go for a clear win and ignore the potential benefits of crushing the union.

 

[tuckerdomi]

Where are the talks being held??

Hi there please tell me where the talks are being held>? is it at the royal york?

 

[BLONG7]

If Bettman doesn't want to accept the new proposal, what 8 teams do you think will vote it down? Calgary and Edmonton come to mind, maybe Nashville too... any others?

 

[hockeytown9321]

If Bettman doesn't want to accept the new proposal, what 8 teams do you think will vote it down? Calgary and Edmonton come to mind, maybe Nashville too... any others?

Probably Carolina, Chicago, Pittsburgh and Boston. Maybe Columbus, Atlanta, Minnesota, Florida, Buffalo.

 

[BLONG7]

Probably Carolina, Chicago, Pittsburgh and Boston. Maybe Columbus, Atlanta, Minnesota, Florida, Buffalo.

So he needs 8 and will probably have 12-13...So the players proposal probably isn't gonna fly...

 

[hockeytown9321]

So he needs 8 and will probably have 12-13...So the players proposal probably isn't gonna fly...

I think there needs to be a two thirds majority to go against Bettman, so they would probably only have to convince a handful of teams to go with the luxury tax. There's gotta be 3 or 4 more sane owners out there.

How bout the teams that would go for the tax? I'm guessing New York, Detroit, Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver, Colorado, LA, Philly, Dallas, St. Louis, maybe Tampa, maybe Montreal, maybe Anaheim.

Like I said, hopefully theres another handful of owners who realize a punitive tax can work and is a better option than destroying the league for a hard cap.

 

[MarkZackKarl]

Is there any logical way to have the owners get their hardcap? Declaring an impasse is ridiculous and wont work since they have not conceeded any of their points (which are what , anyway?) and they are clearly not negotiating in good faith (or trying to negotiate at all). Furthermore, the replacement player situation is absolutely Pejorative Slured, since

1. Fans in US cities dont even care to go see real NHLers, why the hell would they bother to see replacement players ?

2. The replacement player scenario is illegal in Montreal and Vancouver, and probably wouldn't fly in Calgary Edmonton Toronto or Ottawa, either... (thus, alienating 6 of your top 15 markets as well as the most loyal fanbase)

3. Even with drastically reduced to AHL or lower ticket prices, the owners would definitely not bring in enough revenue to make this a sustainable option.

4. Cancelling a whole season will destroy whatever small amount of fans there are in the states and severely hurt Canadian teams as well.

The owners position has always been illogical, and smart fans like myself have been able to see through it. Lets hope they be fair and negotiate a deal with compromises on both sides, which is what will happen anyway. Whats the point of wasting months and months when the end result is pretty clear, anyway?

The 94-04 CBA was great, what a shame.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Is there any logical way to have the owners get their hardcap?

here is my recent suggestion to solve this issue:

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=116614

dr

 

[Lobstertainment]

Wrong forum.

But...Dental Plan...

 

[PecaFan]

Is there any logical way to have the owners get their hardcap? Declaring an impasse is ridiculous and wont work since they have not conceeded any of their points (which are what , anyway?) and they are clearly not negotiating in good faith (or trying to negotiate at all).

2. The replacement player scenario is illegal in Montreal and Vancouver, and probably wouldn't fly in Calgary Edmonton Toronto or Ottawa, either... (thus, alienating 6 of your top 15 markets as well as the most loyal fanbase)

The 94-04 CBA was great, what a shame.

Oh it was good for the players, no doubt. Not for anybody else though. The hockey got worse, the prices went through the roof, and unless you were one of Colorado, Jersey, Detroit or Dallas, you had no shot at winning the Cup.

You're repeating a whole lot of stuff that is not true, or in doubt.

Also, there are questions about whether the provinces recognize the NHLPA as a certified union, like the UAW or the Teamsters, which are protected from replacement workers taking their jobs.

"In Quebec, hockey players are not covered by the labor code," said Michele Poitras, spokeswoman for the Quebec Ministry of Labor.

http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/sports/hockey/9971708.htm

Re: "negotiating in good faith" (emphasis mine):

The obligation does not, however, compel either party to agree to a proposal by the other, nor does it require either party to make a concession to the other.

http://www.nlrb.gov/nlrb/shared_fil...seShared=/nlrb/employee/faqs/default.asp#home

 

[mudcrutch79]

Thanks for that quote about the labour code PecaFan. Noone seems to have been able to explain how the various provincial acts would apply if the union isn't certified in those jurisdictions. That's the first quote I've seen from someone official confirming what I've suspected.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/duluthsuperior/sports/hockey/9971708.htm

You keep flogging this like it's fait accompli. It's not up to the Ministry of Labour Relations in Quebec to decide. Government policy is challenged all the time.

As for the "good faith" link you've provided, again, it's up for interpretation.

 

[mudcrutch79]

You keep flogging this like it's fait accompli. It's not up to the Ministry of Labour Relations in Quebec to decide. Government policy is challenged all the time.

As for the "good faith" link you've provided, again, it's up for interpretation.

This isn't "government policy", it's law. It's been unclear to me how the various provincial LRA's were involved here all along. It still hasn't been satisfactorily explained to me how they would be. There's an official statement saying that they aren't. As for the NHLPA-I don't even think they're certified in the various provinces. The NHL would have a strong argument against them becoming certified in a province by may of thinking.

As for the good faith quote-I'm taking labour law right now, have been studying all weekend, and that's a pretty accurate view of things. The law requires you to actually seek a solution-I'd be surprised to see the NHL reject the PA proposal immediately, if they end up rejecting it-but they don't require any specific concessions beyond a very minimal level, in Canada at least.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

This isn't "government policy", it's law. It's been unclear to me how the various provincial LRA's were involved here all along. It still hasn't been satisfactorily explained to me how they would be. There's an official statement saying that they aren't. As for the NHLPA-I don't even think they're certified in the various provinces. The NHL would have a strong argument against them becoming certified in a province by may of thinking.

As for the good faith quote-I'm taking labour law right now, have been studying all weekend, and that's a pretty accurate view of things. The law requires you to actually seek a solution-I'd be surprised to see the NHL reject the PA proposal immediately, if they end up rejecting it-but they don't require any specific concessions beyond a very minimal level, in Canada at least.

There's the time-honoured example of precedent. Two previous work stoppages whereas the Association was legally recognized as an entity. Granted, neither dispute involved the question of replacement workers, but nonetheless, the Association was recognized as representing its members.

 

[mudcrutch79]

There's the time-honoured example of precedent. Two previous work stoppages whereas the Association were legal recognized. Granted, neither dispute involved the question of replacement workers, but nonetheless, the Association was recognized as representing its members.

Can you give me links to decisions where Canadian labour boards have recognized the PA? Or at the very least, can you give me the case names so I can see them on QL?

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Can you give me links to decisions where Canadian labour boards have recognized the PA? Or at the very least, can you give me the case names so I can see them on QL?

The NHLPA is incorporated in Canada. That grants them legal status.

 

[mudcrutch79]

The NHLPA is incorporated in Canada. That grants them legal status.

Not as a union it doesn't. I'd be somewhat suprised to learn that they're incorporated as well. Maybe I can save us all some time? Are you actually a lawyer or a law student or someone who knows anything about law? If not, with all due respect, I'm don't care to get into this unless you can provide some evidence. PecaFan has provided some links to comments from people who are far more likely to know the correct answers than anyone else here. I can tell you that it makes it sense in terms of what little I do know. What can you offer here?

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Are you actually a lawyer or a law student or someone who knows anything about law? If not, with all due respect, I'm don't care to get into this unless you can provide some evidence.

Giving up, are we? :lol