2012 CBA/Lockout talk, It's not looking good VI

[Pie O My]

Amazingly, the fiscal cliff will have a resolution before the CBA.

and a 100 times more relevant to all of us.

"What's that kid? You a mickey Mantle fan huh? lemme tell ya somethin, Mickey Mantle don't give a shyte about you!!". - Bronx Tale

 

[Roll 4 Lines]

i'm right with you on the apathy bandwagon. I'm tired of the NHL version of the fiscal cliff and have no more interest in Hockey Related Residue and 50/50 coin flips.

This is me:

 

[Therick67]

i'm right with you on the apathy bandwagon. I'm tired of the NHL version of the fiscal cliff and have no more interest in Hockey Related Residue and 50/50 coin flips.

I feel liberated. The last lockout was tough, but after this one it will take me a while before I spend a nickel on this league. I think they've under-estimated the damge this lockout will do to this sport.

 

[Roll 4 Lines]

I feel liberated. The last lockout was tough, but after this one it will take me a while before I spend a nickel on this league. I think they've under-estimated the damge this lockout will do to this sport.

I hear ya loud-n-clear, but I fear a lot of us may be over-estimating the damage this lockout will do.

Hockey fans, including myself (and I'm angry as hell at these maroons), will always love to watch hockey.

We all feel varying degrees of apathy, but we'll be pizzing and moaning about an inept power play, soon as the season starts back up.

 

[Therick67]

I hear ya loud-n-clear, but I fear a lot of us may be over-estimating the damage this lockout will do.

Hockey fans, including myself (and I'm angry as hell at these maroons), will always love to watch hockey.

We all feel varying degrees of apathy, but we'll be pizzing and moaning about an inept power play, soon as the season starts back up.

I'll watch, but I can't see myself going to the 5-8 games a year, or buying any merchandise. I can't remember a year without any Bruins stuff under the tree, but this year that will be the case. My son went from wanting a Lucic jersey to wanting a Gronk jersey..and he got it.
I, like a lot of people have limited entertainment dollars, and I'm not in any hurry to give it to these clowns. One of my character flaws is, I'm a stubborn-cheap *****.

 

[Kaoz*]

So what?

It is either right or wrong, why does the salary matter in right or wrong? It matters in whether or not you feel sympathy for them (I do not), but it shouldn't matter if it is right or fair or not.

We can disagree on the question of the offers and if they are fair or not, but the amount of money involved shouldn't influence that debate.

Necessity and need versus greed (greed not being a bad thing, we're all greedy to some extent). It matters quite a bit when (and only when) comparing the players plight to the average persons which is the context the original question was posed. The average person would and should be upset when their employer approaches them and says they will be rolling back their salaries 25% because for the average person that means they'll likely need to choose which necessity they need to cut out. Power, food, travel, etc etc... The average person also doesn't negotiate a contract under a collective bargaining agreement, and those that do understand that when that collective bargaining agreement changes so can the terms of their employment as CBA's can regulate everything involved with employment.

No players should be shocked that the owners are suggesting changing the financials of the new CBA around to suit the economic landscape of the NHL. The idea that this is equivalent to my employer coming to me and rolling back my wages 25% does not jive in the least.

Your analogy doesn't fit.

Did you sign a contract with your company? Is that contract up for re-negotiation? Would you try to negotiate terms you thought were the best you could get or deserved? Or would you just take what they tell you you should get?

I no longer have to renegotiate a contract, I did at one time year to year (12 month contracts). When I did I would try to negotiate terms in my best interest, and as I've stated many many times, I don't begrudge the players their right to do just that. That doesn't mean I need to agree with their point of view or with their reasoning.

I now play a part in the process of negotiating contracts with employees and when we look at those contracts, they need to align with the financial needs of the company and must not fall out of line with what we'd expect in regards to market value for those services. None of which is really comparable to what happens in the NHL, two entirely different processes.

You are saying you don't refuse to work when you don't get your bonus, but you agreed to those parameters when you took the job on the bonus.

This example just isn't close to the deal with the CBA. Also, the players are not refusing to work. They would work right now. The issue is the parameters they will work under in the future.

Not so, this is a different point altogether. We're no longer comparing the two scenarios, nhl player versus average everyday joe, we're talking about expectations when signing a contract, and that is comparable. The idea that NHL players have a right to be enraged because the financials of the business are being adjusted by the owners is in my opinion, bogus.

Players signed a contract they knew would and could be affected drastically by renegotiating a CBA. The players knew exactly when the CBA expired when they signed those contracts. Because of that NHL owners changing the financials of an NHL players contract is completely different then the average worker being told the same thing by their bosses. NHL players entered into their contract knowing it was completely regulated by a CBA that was about to expire, and with very recent examples of just that scenario playing out. If I entered into a contract with those expectations then I would have far less right to be shocked and angered at such a scenario, especially if the owners could back up their reasoning with financial numbers. I'd have the right to fight it through whatever union I belonged yes, and the union would spin it to make them look bad and the worker look good, however that wouldn't change the fact that I entered into my contract knowing full well that exact scenario could happen. If I was at all business savvy and followed the two lockouts of the other professional leagues in the country it wouldn't even be unexpected.

So, I'd of course be able to go find work elsewhere if I thought the work elsewhere was better. In the event that I didn't, the idea that I and my fellow employees could hold the company hostage until I got more favorable terms regardless of how that affected the business in the long term would be something I wouldn't agree with from a moral standpoint regardless of what side of the coin I fell on, especially if that company was compensating me at a far far far far better rate then anyone else in the market already, with a benefit package that blew all others out of the water. I suspect there are many players that fall in this category right now that could care less about all the political BS and just want to get back to the game.

If I were an investor in that company who was disassociated from both the owners and the workers financials I'd be more angered at the workers in such a scenario then I would be at the owners as I'd want the company to thrive long term.

 

[Number8]

First of all, I don't think that even remotely resembles what happened.

I think the owners said something along the lines of,"Revenues in the previous CBA has been split 57%-43% in favor of the players. Our first offer reverses that to 57%-43% in favor of the owners."

Then very shortly they had come real close to 50%-50%, or had even agreed to it.

But the players, instead of keeping things in perspective, and keeping the best interest of both themselves and the sport in mind, are playing the victim because the first offer hurt their feelings, at least according to the article I quoted.

And, in no way shape or form to I resemble Mahatma Gandhi, but in negotiations I have no issues with laughhing it off and presenting a counter offer.

And call bull crap all you want, I could not care less what you think of me, but I would never dream of giving up 1/3 of a year's salary or more because of feeling insulted by an initial offer.

I'm sorry. I didn't meant to come off like a dick. Just frustrated.

My point is just that if I have a contract based on a 57% split of revenues (reasonable or not, that's what the CBA that the owners "won" the last time said) and someone tells me it will go to 43% -- that is a 24.6% haircut. Further, it comes on the heels of me giving 24% immediate payback if I was in the league the last time around.

I'd say you've locked me out before, you're obviously intent on locking me out now, and my guess is you'll do it again the very next time we do this dance.

If I were a player, I'd tell Gary Bettman that he could stick the partnership between the players and owners up his backside. Which, whether it's a smart move or not, is exactly what has happened, I think.

Again, I didn't mean to be a dick though. Apologies.

 

[Number8]

Oh, and by the way, about 3-1/2 years ago my boss came to me and said "We're cutting everyone's hours from 40 to 32 to avoid laying people off."

I wasn't insulted. I was ecstatic to keep my job at all.

I said, that sucks, but it's awesome that we can all keep our jobs, even with a 20% pay cut.

So, not 24% but damn close enough for my argument.

And 20 months later, when we finally went back to 40 hours, I was one day away from having my home foreclosed on. One day.

The NHL and the NHLPA can all go fist themselves as far as I'm concerned.

Again, apologies for coming across aggressive. Bottom line is you are absolutely correct -- both parties can pound salt.

Regardless of how we got where we are, this whole thing has been handled atrociously on so many levels it's not true.

I love the Bruins and hockey, but I really do hope this takes the league and the players a long time to get back into good shape. It's the only thing that will make this collective group of fools to think twice before doing this crap again -- let alone again and again and again.

 

[bruinsfan1970]

Closing this one down.