News Article: Arizona Coyotes accused of not properly paying employees, union busting in NLRB complaints

[PhoPhan]

Link

The National Labor Relations Board launched two investigations into the Arizona Coyotes during the past 13 months, probing allegations that the National Hockey League team spied on staff, engaged in union busting and fired two employees who raised concerns about pay, federal records say.

It is getting really, really hard to root for this team.

Click to read more...

 

[Matias Maccete]

It's like they actively try to drive away fans.

 

[ParisSaintGermain]

 

[BOGO]

All I can say is that I hope it was the former regime that was the cause of all of this and not AB/Chayka. There really is no excuse.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

This is Arizona. Every large corporation actively dissuades workers to unionize.

 

[offkilter]

I'm not surprised given how they missed payroll several times with the AHL team when it was in Portland and had to beg the local reporters to keep quiet about it.

 

[rt]

Good. Keep the pinkos out.

 

[KG]

Interesting. Hope we can keep politics out of this discussion.

 

[PerpetualTankYear]

This team man...

 

[MIGs Dog]

Accusations from disgruntled former employees. The organization is innocent until proven otherwise. The fact they paid a settlement means nothing.

 

[ClassLessCoyote]

Good. Keep the pinkos out.

So you want to throw all of the players out and keep them out too? Just because someone is part of a union that doesn't mean the person is a pinko.

 

[ClassLessCoyote]

Link



It is getting really, really hard to root for this team.

If what the team is doing is true then what the team is doing is no different than what any other NHL franchise or business would do. No business wants to have a union.

 

[ClassLessCoyote]

Accusations from disgruntled former employees. The organization is innocent until proven otherwise. The fact they paid a settlement means nothing.

That's an odd response given what you said before.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threa...-travel-bureau.2110827/page-34#post-131111715

A not guilty verdict doesn't mean you didn't do it

I would expect you more to say something like this "The fact that there's a settlement means that they did something wrong and are trying to avoid further punishment". If there's no wrong doing, why settle when you can fight it and make those who made such accusations and lost have to pay the legal fees when they lose in court?

 

[MIGs Dog]

..why settle when you can fight it and make those who made such accusations and lost have to pay the legal fees when they lose in court?

Many times it's cheaper and avoids negative publicity to pay
a settlement. Guilty or not.

 

[XX]

Good. Keep the pinkos out.

Come again?

 

[Firestorm]

Accusations from disgruntled former employees. The organization is innocent until proven otherwise. The fact they paid a settlement means nothing.

You do realize we live in 2017 where people take things immediately at face value right?

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Given how IceArizona "managed" this team from the time they took over in 2013, I am not at all surprised that they could be culpable of this kind of malfeasance. Not surprised at all.

The compliance review of their performance in the Glendale deal certainly indicates that their way of doing business sucked.

 

[PhoPhan]

Accusations from disgruntled former employees. The organization is innocent until proven otherwise. The fact they paid a settlement means nothing.

Everybody get a load of the constitutional scholar over here.

 

[rt]

So you want to throw all of the players out and keep them out too? Just because someone is part of a union that doesn't mean the person is a pinko.

I don't think anyone uses the term "pinko" earnestly anymore. If someone is using that term, I think it's safe to assume it's in jest.

 

[rt]

Come again?

I just enjoy a good union busting. I love the idea conceptually.

 

[XX]

I just enjoy a good union busting. I love the idea conceptually.

People genuinely believe that, so assuming sarcasm isn't possible.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

Everybody get a load of the constitutional scholar over here.

Hold on just a bit. As someone falsely accused during a contested divorce (it was about money, thank goodness), this non-lawyer can attest that false accusations happen.

It is clearly the prerogative of a company to be against unionization. The accusation that the team crossed the line into illegality in their anti union activities cannot and should not be assumed based upon the word of a former employee or two. As for the settlement, it could simply be that the settlement cost to the organization was less than the cost of litigation.

 

[Coyotedroppings]

People genuinely believe that, so assuming sarcasm isn't possible.

It's a humorous way to address the FACT that too often being union is merely an excuse to be an overpaid lazy pile of dung. Having said that, it's not ALWAYS the case, so throwing a little humor toward it is (imo) a good thing, unless you're too hellbent on the idea that the pendulum that has been management/union situation since the dawn of labor doesn't belong in the middle.... one way or the other.

 

[XX]

It's a humorous way to address the FACT that too often being union is merely an excuse to be an overpaid lazy pile of dung. Having said that, it's not ALWAYS the case, so throwing a little humor toward it is (imo) a good thing, unless you're too hellbent on the idea that the pendulum that has been management/union situation since the dawn of labor doesn't belong in the middle.... one way or the other.

It doesn't have to be and wasn't always adversarial. The only ones left alive today are obstructionist in nature.

It doesn't really matter, though. The Coyotes shouldn't be shortchanging basic line employees. That's absolutely pathetic.

 

[BigMac1212]

Time to hit whatever booze you prefer, the season finale can't come soon enough...