Another Lockout

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
They did invest. They invested time, work, risk in many cases.

Youre confusing investing in your own career vs investing in someone else's business.

Everyone invests in their own career. That diesnt entitle them to anything more than the wage of that career. It doesnt entitle them to the profits if the business that employs them.
 

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,276
109,799
NYC
Okay. Well you strike me as someone rather inexperienced with the working world.

And im guessing youve got some parents that are unionized workers too.

You seem very naive about the working world, and especially how the different types of employment work.

Contract employment is nothing like being a permanent employee, but you seem to be trying to afford the pros of being a perm employee to an employment model that doesnt work the same way.

Quite simply, youre speaking well beyond the limits of your knowledge.
Actually I am a contract employee and have been pretty much always outside of my first crappy retail job (which was a lot longer ago than you think).

It hasn't happened yet, thank goodness, but my employer can tell me at any time that they don't want me anymore, for no reason other than they don't.

No employer should ever have the right to do that to somebody who is meeting job requirements.

I've accepted that this is how it works for now and that I ultimately chose to do what I do. That doesn't mean I'll remain silent and not fight to change the situation.

It's not naive to want rights. It's naive to think there's only one way of doing things.

If workers always threw their hands up and said "dems the breaks" we would still be serfs.
 

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,276
109,799
NYC
Youre confusing investing in your own career vs investing in someone else's business.

Everyone invests in their own career. That diesnt entitle them to anything more than the wage of that career. It doesnt entitle them to the profits if the business that employs them.
They produced those profits.
 

Saltcreek

Registered User
Nov 23, 2016
1,272
1,545
They produced those profits.

Correction. They helped produce those profits. The league, owners, management staff, trainers, etc all had their input to help the league be successful. The players have no job if the league or owners do not do their part.
 

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,276
109,799
NYC
Correction. They helped produce those profits. The league, owners, management staff, trainers, etc all had their input to help the league be successful. The players have no job if the league or owners do not do their part.
Ok they helped. So they should get some of what they helped make.

And yes, in the grand scheme of things, NHL players are doing very well with 50-50.
 

Eisen

Registered User
Sep 30, 2009
16,737
3,101
Duesseldorf
Correction. They helped produce those profits. The league, owners, management staff, trainers, etc all had their input to help the league be successful. The players have no job if the league or owners do not do their part.
You can have legues without owners, where every club is the boss. The owners did nothing except buy something from the league. They have done very little compared to the rest.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
Actually I am a contract employee and have been pretty much always outside of my first crappy retail job (which was a lot longer ago than you think).

It hasn't happened yet, thank goodness, but my employer can tell me at any time that they don't want me anymore, for no reason other than they don't.

No employer should ever have the right to do that to somebody who is meeting job requirements.

I've accepted that this is how it works for now and that I ultimately chose to do what I do. That doesn't mean I'll remain silent and not fight to change the situation.

It's not naive to want rights. It's naive to think there's only one way of doing things.

If workers always threw their hands up and said "dems the breaks" we would still be serfs.
If you want more rights you negotiate them in your contract. Its that simple.

I chose to be a contract worker because i get paid much more. There are pros and cons of being contract vs perm.

If all contracts came with all sorts of job security, companies wouldnt use them as much. They use contracts as a means of being able to adjust to workload (among other things). Why would a company pay more for that contract employee if it offered them no advantage?

You cant have your cake and eat it too. You accept the cons along with the pros.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
They produced those profits.
just like every other contract employee.

A plumbing employee that only hires contract plumbers doesnt profit without those plumbers either. Those plumbers "produced" the profit. That doesnt entitle those contract plumbers any more than the contract dictates. They dont get a share of profit. They get the payment dictated by the contract, whatever that may be, nothing more.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
Ok they helped. So they should get some of what they helped make.

And yes, in the grand scheme of things, NHL players are doing very well with 50-50.
They do!!!! They get 50% of revenue!!!! Hell theyre very fortunate that its revenue instead of profit. It doesnt even matter if the owners lose money, they still get their cut. This is the NHL we are talking. A cut of revenue is way better than a cut of profit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saltcreek

Saltcreek

Registered User
Nov 23, 2016
1,272
1,545
You can have legues without owners, where every club is the boss. The owners did nothing except buy something from the league. They have done very little compared to the rest.

Please name a league without owners that is successful. I am not talking some local softball league, I am talking a major pro sports league such as football (American or "soccer"), hockey, baseball, basketball, lacrosse, etc.
 

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,285
12,586
South Mountain
I think the NHL uses it.

The opt out would cause a possible lockout/strike in the 20-21 season.

Not using it, would cause a possible lockout/strike in the 21-22 season, the same year Seattle is scheduled to begin play.

The NHL will use the option for that reason, so there is resolution before Seattle enters the league. Seattle wanted to begin play in 20-21, and the NHL said no for that reason.

The CBA ends before either 2020-21 or 2022-23. Whichever it is, Seattle is safe starting play in 2021-22.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thomp94

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,276
109,799
NYC
If you want more rights you negotiate them in your contract. Its that simple.

I chose to be a contract worker because i get paid much more. There are pros and cons of being contract vs perm.

If all contracts came with all sorts of job security, companies wouldnt use them as much. They use contracts as a means of being able to adjust to workload (among other things). Why would a company pay more for that contract employee if it offered them no advantage?

You cant have your cake and eat it too. You accept the cons along with the pros.
We did negotiate. We got told no on absolutely everything.

Workers have no power in our society and it's sad.

Your job is different but in my case, we want permanent status. There's absolutely no advantages to working this job on a contract basis so it's not a matter of taking pros with the cons. The powers that be simply to do it spend less.

I love my work and I work extremely hard at it. Nobody deserves to stepped on.

I understand that things have to make sense for the company as well but surely there's a middle ground that's fair for everyone.

That's why, unless they're a complete liability, I'll always side with the worker.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
We did negotiate. We got told no on absolutely everything.

Workers have no power in our society and it's sad.

Your job is different but in my case, we want permanent status. There's absolutely no advantages to working this job on a contract basis so it's not a matter of taking pros with the cons. The powers that be simply to do it spend less.

I love my work and I work extremely hard at it. Nobody deserves to stepped on.

I understand that things have to make sense for the company as well but surely there's a middle ground that's fair for everyone.

That's why, unless they're a complete liability, I'll always side with the worker.
"We" did negotiate?

If you got told no, take your services elsewhere. If no one is willing to pay you more, then youre not worth more.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ZeroPucksGiven

tony d

Registered User
Jun 23, 2007
76,590
4,550
Behind A Tree
Won't be an opt out but with the NHL's history of issues with lockouts it wouldn't surprise me to see another 1 when that time comes.
 

Saltcreek

Registered User
Nov 23, 2016
1,272
1,545
The Bundesliga doesn't have owners.

That is an interesting example but the Bundesliga does have tight partnerships with major corporations to offset their costs and clubs lean on them for sponsorship. Effectively, corporations subsidise the league. That is not going to work in many places around the world but I will concede that it does work for the German football league.
 

txpd

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
69,649
14,131
New Bern, NC
just like every other contract employee.

A plumbing employee that only hires contract plumbers doesnt profit without those plumbers either. Those plumbers "produced" the profit. That doesnt entitle those contract plumbers any more than the contract dictates. They dont get a share of profit. They get the payment dictated by the contract, whatever that may be, nothing more.

Entitle is the operative word. Earn might be a better word. Right? A poor owner can kill a business and make the best plumber an unemployed plumber with a suddenly smudged rep. Its a know your value thing. There is no question that NHL players have earned the percentage of revenue the league makes.
 

Eisen

Registered User
Sep 30, 2009
16,737
3,101
Duesseldorf
That is an interesting example but the Bundesliga does have tight partnerships with major corporations to offset their costs and clubs lean on them for sponsorship. Effectively, corporations subsidise the league. That is not going to work in many places around the world but I will concede that it does work for the German football league.
That is true. The rules ensure that the corporations can't have more than 49% of a club. Of course you could just sell stock to a lot of private owners like Dortmund did. Dortmund only owns about 7% of their own club.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
Entitle is the operative word. Earn might be a better word. Right? A poor owner can kill a business and make the best plumber an unemployed plumber with a suddenly smudged rep. Its a know your value thing. There is no question that NHL players have earned the percentage of revenue the league makes.
Earned the percentage ofbrevenue the league makes?

I dont think that makes sense.
 

Machinehead

GoAwayKakko
Jan 21, 2011
141,276
109,799
NYC
"We" did negotiate?

If you got told no, take your services elsewhere. If no one is willing to pay you more, then youre not worth more.
I'm not a hockey player. I get the going rate.

You seem to think workers have way more power than they do.
 

Saltcreek

Registered User
Nov 23, 2016
1,272
1,545
I'm not a hockey player. I get the going rate.

You seem to think workers have way more power than they do.

That all depends where you are in the world. Live in the US and you have fewer workers rights when compared to the EU. Off topic but true.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
I'm not a hockey player. I get the going rate.

You seem to think workers have way more power than they do.

I think thats an ironic statement coming from you. Youve argued contract workers should be entitled to a portion of profits and thats insane to me.

But lets start by your statement that "workers" have more rights.... there are more than one type of worker and they all have different rights. The type we are speaking of currently are contract workers and they are entitled to two basic things. First, a safe and non-descriminant workplace, which everyone is entitled to. And the compensation and environment as defined in their contract. Nothing more.

As ive said, if you want the rights of things like severance pay, that are afforded to permanent employees, one should look for employment in that capacity. If you dont want the rights and compensation that come with being a contract employee.... i recommend you look for a different job. Whether it be different employer, or different line of work, thats your choice.

You are absolutely afforded that right. No one is forcing you to work for the employer you work for. Your employer is obligated to provide a safe working environment and compensate you according to your contract, NOTHING more.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->