An open challenge to "owner supporters"

[guitaraholic*]

which is apparently most of you as all I ever read on this board is how the owners are not to blame and it's all the fault of the big bad greedy players... blah blah blah. Anyway, you folks assert that a salary cap of some kind (I read many of your posts saying things like "players shouldn't make more than a million a year.." and crap like that) is a reasonable solution or even a fair option to 'solving' the current CBA issues, which it isn't. So, I have a simple challenge for you: Find any other profession in the United States (the NHL is, I believe, based in New York and is technically an American enterprise) where pay rates are artificially capped by a governing entity. Find even one. Find any profession where the governing body of that profession says a person CANNNOT make more than $xxx,xxx.xx amount per year. I want you guys to know just how unbelievably morally wrong it is for one person to dictate to another the amount of money they can make in a (erstwhile) free market economy. I'd particularly be amused by any Republicans who want to take up the position that the league has the right to intervene in a free marketplace and regulate it. Please, make my day.

Click to read more...

 

[Loki]

Here's two the NFL and NBA.

Next question.

 

[triggrman]

My job's ceiling is 48k a year.

Almost every union company I've ever seen has set scales for employee wages.

 

[Seachd]

Find other ones that trade workers (and rights to future workers) between companies.

 

[guitaraholic*]

Here's two the NFL and NBA.

Next question.

i knew someone would throw this out as an example and it doesn't wash. Furthermore I specifically said find an example of where an INDIVIDUALS wage is capped. Those leagues have salary caps for teams, not the same thing at all. I am talking specfically about individuals earnings. I do not know anything about the NFL or NBA but I do not believe they cap individual player salaries. I also understand that the NBA's 'cap' is basically a joke with a million loopholes.
So, do those leagues cap individual players salaries or not? If not, then your reply isn't even relevent to my original post.
Next answer...

 

[Chaos2k7]

Sorry but I work for the CCRA and with one of the best union's Canada-wide anyway, every employee has a ceiling on what they can make at a certain level and with a certain experience level.

No one is saying the owners didn't make mistakes, because they did dop the ball, but, lets get real here, the fans cannot support the league the way the system operated as of September 15th, 2004 and they closed up shop.

Now if I could find one part of the players proposal that wasn't suggesting the owners give up more money while the players do nothing much more than a 5% percent rollback in salaries I might tend to agree that there were making serious proposals. It's not hard to agree on a system where the players continue to give nothing back to the league that made them. Easy to give away other peoples money ie a luxury tax system, instead of the millions off over-inflated contract isn't it.

Put Jaromir Jagr at 11 million a year, or Bobby Holik at 9 million a year, in a room and have them explain to the lowest paid player in the league, why the lowest paid player isn't playing and making a living because Jagr needs more. It just won't happen. In '94 the players had an actual problem. They did deserve more money. And they got it and then some. Why should they be paid millions while they put the league into chapter 11?

Who here putting everything aside would run unsuccessful buisnesses in any field of work, not just NHL franchises, if you were being bled dry and your employees, and all they kept saying was: we want more, you should pay out more money even though you are losing millions. Nobody would.

Calculate a 5% rollback in salaries from your teams last payroll and ask yourself if that extra 3.5-4 million dollars AT MOST would change anything in a marketplace in which they lost 10-15 million on average.

Significant proposals? From who? Is it too much for the players to be like every other professional sporting league in the world? Why? What is the real reason?

 

[Go Flames Go*]

Go outside your house get a job, and you will understand how the world works. There caps, or cellings, and floors everywhere.

If you apply to McDonald today they will say 5.50 a hour, you cannot negotiate it and demand for more money, like the NHL players do, they demand to be paid and the owners have no choice, and to keep fans coming they have to shell out. They hold out and sit on there ass if they don't get there big money deals, even though the owners offer them what they fell they are worth, just how Goodenow describes the current system.

NFL is the best league, the players make a ton of money, they have a salary cap, the Arizona Cardinals suck, yet they still make money.

 

[guitaraholic*]

My job's ceiling is 48k a year.

Almost every union company I've ever seen has set scales for employee wages.

You're correct about Unions often agreeing to wage scales for employees of different experience, etc. This is the one example I believe supports the case for ownership regulation of salaries, so I will definately accept it as a good example for the artificial regulation of an individuals pay rate. Can I trouble you to PM your particular occupation to me and what union governs it? I'd appreciate it.
I'm curious, though, if you feel it's acceptable to cap individual earnings and yet your bosses (the managers of the company, shareholders, etc, whatever the case may be) are free to reap as much profit off the back of your labour as they can with no limiting factors whatsoever?

 

[guitaraholic*]

Go outside your house get a job, and you will understand how the world works. There caps, or cellings, and floors everywhere.

If you apply to McDonald today they will say 5.50 a hour, you cannot negotiate it and demand for more money, like the NHL players do, they demand to be paid and the owners have no choice, and to keep fans coming they have to shell out. They hold out and sit on there ass if they don't get there big money deals, even though the owners offer them what they fell they are worth, just how Goodenow describes the current system.

NFL is the best league, the players make a ton of money, they have a salary cap, the Arizona Cardinals suck, yet they still make money.

I've worked since I was 18 years old. As you began your reply with an ad hominen attack directed towards me I won't bother reading the rest of your reply.

 

[Go Flames Go*]

i knew someone would throw this out as an example and it doesn't wash. Furthermore I specifically said find an example of where an INDIVIDUALS wage is capped. Those leagues have salary caps for teams, not the same thing at all. I am talking specfically about individuals earnings. I do not know anything about the NFL or NBA but I do not believe they cap individual player salaries. I also understand that the NBA's 'cap' is basically a joke with a million loopholes.
So, do those leagues cap individual players salaries or not? If not, then your reply isn't even relevent to my original post.
Next answer...

THATS WHAT THE NHL HAS PROPOSED A TEAM SALARY CAP. Jeremey Roenick said player caps, there are individual caps on people in the world, learn what you are talking about or don't speak at all son.

 

[Jovo Cop]

I guess when 20000 people pay to watch Bob fix the plumbing or Larry fix your truck then we will cap their salary at 1.3 mill .
seriousely every job is capped by what the market will bear .If you want your carpets cleaned and company A charges 200 bucks and Company B charges 300 ..who do you go to ???
Why is it taboo for an owner who plunks down 100 million for a franchise , takes all the risk ..why is it so bad for him to want a salary cap to ensure he makes a profit on his heavy investment .
Are the owners being so mean that they want to pay guys to play a game for 1.3 million on average .

 

[Diaboli]

i knew someone would throw this out as an example and it doesn't wash. Furthermore I specifically said find an example of where an INDIVIDUALS wage is capped. Those leagues have salary caps for teams, not the same thing at all. I am talking specfically about individuals earnings. I do not know anything about the NFL or NBA but I do not believe they cap individual player salaries. I also understand that the NBA's 'cap' is basically a joke with a million loopholes.
So, do those leagues cap individual players salaries or not? If not, then your reply isn't even relevent to my original post.
Next answer...

If I've understood correctly, the teams wanted a cap at 30 or 35 million, so then it wouldn't limit ones pay, but to 30 or 35 mil. That's the same as in the NBA and NFL. The players can decide what they want to demand, but there might be no team capable of paying them what they want. For example Shaquille O'Neal kept his wage "in a reasonable amount", because he wanted to play in a successful team. That isn't possible in a team with just one good player.

edit: btw do you now how much the NFL and NBA get from TV, ads etc.? A lot more than the NHL teams I can assure you.

 

[habitual_hab]

Go outside your house get a job, and you will understand how the world works. There caps, or cellings, and floors everywhere. .

That's not very nice. I own my own business and I negotiate wages with my employees. And never, unlike NHL players, have my employees taken a wage cut.

If you apply to McDonald today they will say 5.50 a hour, you cannot negotiate it and demand for more money.

Actually you can. Whether they hire you or not is another question. Food service workers are hired through the market. Why not NHL players?

 

[Chaos2k7]

Players keep talking about an open marketplace.

Where under the rules of a hard cap does it say that a team cannot pay a particular player a particular amount of money, except in the NBA?

NFL players make money hand over fist and to avoid the cap the owners simply front load contracts with hefty signing bonuses. You are telling me that the players could still not receive "fair value" under such a system? What exactly is fair value in this marketplace?

No jobs, no money. What exactly is 95% of nothing?



I really have no sympathy for either side, but in this case the players got used to the good life in a system that could not support them, and now they would rather have the system die then give back to the league.

Let's break it down here:

Lockout - a long one, means contraction, probably.

Contraction means less jobs, but who gets cut first? The lesser paid players. Because I would say on average they have less skill, so less demand for players of that ilk. All the top talents and top paid players would still find jobs. Becuase those are the people casual fans come to see, can't afford to lose them.

Think about it, the players care for nothing more then their own salaries. What are they willing to give up? Three major points:

5% Rollback - Does nothing to help solve the problems now.
Luxury Tax System - Not their money to give away so why do they care?
Entry Level Contracts Reduced - I thought they said they cared about the younger guys? No problems giving away money from players who have yet to suit up in the league. No voting rights, no consideration.

The highly paid players want to keep what they have, they could contract all day long and spread as much of the owners money around as they want, it doesn't fix the problems now. They care nothing for their own union members or future members, they would rather see the league die then to admit they won't help to save it.

And how could anyone support the owners position? Huh? I just don't get it...

 

[Go Flames Go*]

That's not very nice. I own my own business and I negotiate wages with my employees. And never, unlike NHL players, have my employees taken a wage cut.



Actually you can. Whether they hire you or not is another question. Food service workers are hired through the market. Why not NHL players?

Which part of a cap restricts a market place, which part takes away negotiation of a cotract worth multimillion dollars, I don't see your point. We too own a business, we don't negotiate salaries, we have a cap on what we pay people so we know that we can keep running a succsefull business.

 

[YellHockey*]

Sorry but I work for the CCRA

I'm willing to bet that you don't work for the CCRA since such an organization doesn't exist. Do you not know the name of your employer?

 

[Chaos2k7]

Sorry but the name we use now: Canadian Border Services or CBS, (Yes, just like the television mogul, which is the reason I chose not to use it, seeing as how Americans read and post here...) is not as well known, as it has only been used for less than a year here anyways, I could be wrong about the exact date outside of the Niagara region, unlike CCRA which was used for years. I would wager not everyone on these boards has knowledge of Canada let alone our recent re-structuring of our customs operations, if you would like to debate it I am sure I could send you a scanned photo of my pay stub.

You obviously knew exactly what I meant or you wouldn't have commented on it, so I guess it wasn't that far off from accomplishing my objective huh?

Jeez try to eliminate problems and confusion and I find the one anal poster on this topic. Enjoy.

 

[Loki]

i knew someone would throw this out as an example and it doesn't wash. Furthermore I specifically said find an example of where an INDIVIDUALS wage is capped. Those leagues have salary caps for teams, not the same thing at all. I am talking specfically about individuals earnings. I do not know anything about the NFL or NBA but I do not believe they cap individual player salaries. I also understand that the NBA's 'cap' is basically a joke with a million loopholes.
So, do those leagues cap individual players salaries or not? If not, then your reply isn't even relevent to my original post.
Next answer...

The NBA caps individual earnings

 

[Hasbro]

You're correct about Unions often agreeing to wage scales for employees of different experience, etc. This is the one example I believe supports the case for ownership regulation of salaries, so I will definately accept it as a good example for the artificial regulation of an individuals pay rate. Can I trouble you to PM your particular occupation to me and what union governs it? I'd appreciate it.
I'm curious, though, if you feel it's acceptable to cap individual earnings and yet your bosses (the managers of the company, shareholders, etc, whatever the case may be) are free to reap as much profit off the back of your labour as they can with no limiting factors whatsoever?

In effect isn't that what the owners are doing by setting aside a certain percentage of earnings? The players are capped at 50% then so would ownership.

i knew someone would throw this out as an example and it doesn't wash. Furthermore I specifically said find an example of where an INDIVIDUALS wage is capped. Those leagues have salary caps for teams, not the same thing at all. I am talking specfically about individuals earnings. I do not know anything about the NFL or NBA but I do not believe they cap individual player salaries. I also understand that the NBA's 'cap' is basically a joke with a million loopholes.
So, do those leagues cap individual players salaries or not? If not, then your reply isn't even relevent to my original post.
Next answer...

The NBA does have a max salary for a player and a set scale on rookies.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

We too own a business, we don't negotiate salaries, we have a cap on what we pay people so we know that we can keep running a succsefull business.

and if you had a really great employee who contributes directly to your companies ability to provide its service and he demanded a raise and you wanted to give it to him, who is stopping you ?

would you be happy if you were told, "sorry, you arent allowed to pay him, only your competitor is"

OR to keep him, you have to cut other productive workers and let your competitor have them.

bye bye employee and you cant do a thing about it, even if you wanted to.

sounds fair doesnt it ... note sarcasm.

dr

 

[Chaos2k7]

and if you had a really great employee who contributes directly to your companies ability to provide its service and he demanded a raise and you wanted to give it to him, who is stopping you ?

would you be happy if you were told, "sorry, you arent allowed to pay him, only your competitor is"

bye bye employee and you cant do a thing about it, even if you wanted to.

sounds fair doesnt it ... note sarcasm.

dr

Who in this CBA situation is saying that?

 

[triggrman]

You're correct about Unions often agreeing to wage scales for employees of different experience, etc. This is the one example I believe supports the case for ownership regulation of salaries, so I will definately accept it as a good example for the artificial regulation of an individuals pay rate. Can I trouble you to PM your particular occupation to me and what union governs it? I'd appreciate it.
I'm curious, though, if you feel it's acceptable to cap individual earnings and yet your bosses (the managers of the company, shareholders, etc, whatever the case may be) are free to reap as much profit off the back of your labour as they can with no limiting factors whatsoever?

I'm not union, I'm in facilty management, but I work with trade unions all the time. My dad is UA Coordinator (aka union boss).

Owners are taking all the risk, they have the most vested into the company, of course they should make the most money.

 

[eye]

Gary Bettman, Bob Goodenow and myself all work under a salary cap, as do millions of other normal working people. Fans both directly and indirectly pay for player salaries and were tired of getting ripped off at the gate. Bettman and the owners stand is long overdue.

 

[triggrman]

and if you had a really great employee who contributes directly to your companies ability to provide its service and he demanded a raise and you wanted to give it to him, who is stopping you ?

would you be happy if you were told, "sorry, you arent allowed to pay him, only your competitor is"

OR to keep him, you have to cut other productive workers and let your competitor have them.

bye bye employee and you cant do a thing about it, even if you wanted to.

sounds fair doesnt it ... note sarcasm.

dr

Ok, flip that this way. Your favorite employer just got a call from a headhunter offering him a job doing the same thing for twice the money for a company in a bigger city, that can pay twice as much, they make the same call to every single one of your employees, your employees demand raises that exceed your revenue, what do you do?

Remember the NHLPA calls anything that ties revenue to salaries a "salary cap"

 

[eye]

and if you had a really great employee who contributes directly to your companies ability to provide its service and he demanded a raise and you wanted to give it to him, who is stopping you ?

would you be happy if you were told, "sorry, you arent allowed to pay him, only your competitor is"

OR to keep him, you have to cut other productive workers and let your competitor have them.

bye bye employee and you cant do a thing about it, even if you wanted to.


sounds fair doesnt it ... note sarcasm.

dr

Demented, are you a player or a players spouse or parent? Every successful business works with some form of cap or idea of how much money is allotted to employee salaries. Get real. Hockey players and more specifically Bob Goodenow need to wake up and smell the coffee. Fans no longer want to pay and support players at outrageous salaries and FANS want and need lower or stable ticket prices. The Leafs are notorious for raising ticket prices every single year to the point where you have to mortgage the house to go see a game with your family.