Branch appeals to Ontario Government
- Thread starter Tarantula
- Start date
Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
WaW
Armchair Assistant Coffee Gofer for the GM
- Mar 18, 2017
- 2,574
- 3,090
Surprised this hasn't been posted yet, but great news for junior hockey fans everywhere!
Ontario excludes OHL players from provincial employment standards - Sportsnet.ca
Ontario excludes OHL players from provincial employment standards - Sportsnet.ca
Everywhere? Great news? This is no settlement to the litigation, just the recently elected government reclusing junior hockey from their employer standards act. That becomes jibberish and not worth the paper it was drafted on if the suit is heard and won or there is a settlement out of court. I don't see this meaning or changing anything at all as the settlement from the suit, however it shakes down, would over ride this. Really nothing to see here.
WaW
Armchair Assistant Coffee Gofer for the GM
- Mar 18, 2017
- 2,574
- 3,090
I don't really want to get into a debate about the ESA, but considering I apply it at work every single day, I'm pretty confident that this is a pretty big deal. The courts have never really ruled on exemptions. That typically varies from government to government and changes with new legislation. I mean a FAR more contentious issue than junior hockey teams for years was the crown corporation exemption from ESA (Bill 148 ended much of the Crown Corp exemption), but I digress. There remain far more controversial exemptions to the ESA than junior hockey teams.
It's fine to flex your internet muscles and all to look like the smart guy, and honestly your point aside from the snarkyness and the "nothing to see here" nonsense in attempt to shoot my point down is somewhat valid. Civil suits are very much independent from the law. But what I think you're missing is that this change to the ESA opens the door for the OHL to have a "without prejudice and precedent" out of court settlement with a commitment to enhance the education packages and stipends to put the issue to rest without ever having to go as far as paying a minimum wage.
I guess it goes without saying but politicians know what they're doing (whether you agree with the ones in power or not) when it comes to amending the law, and in this case the PCs know full well that the courts are unlikely to touch their amendments to the ESA as long as they aren't radical; and for reasons I exemplified in my top paragraph, this declaration clearly is not radical at all.
Last edited:
EvenSteven
Registered User
- Sep 3, 2009
- 7,482
- 6,441
I believe that whoever is behind the movement to "unionize" the players in the CHL went about it the wrong way. I don't really believe that players were looking for minimum-wage pay. I believe they would've been happy enough with an increased weekly per diem along with guaranteed education no matter if they sign pro deals or not.
Look at Luke Opilka in Kitchener. He just announced his retirement from hockey. Sure he signed an NHL entry-level deal but never played a game in the NHL. I doubt if he drew a paycheck in the AHL this year due to injury. Here's an example of a player who, from what I understand after talking to a source (who may or may not be right), will not be able to have his education paid for because he signed an entry-level deal. This after playing in Kitchener for three years if you include last year where he couldn't play due to injury suffered at this level.
Instead of seeking a minimum wage (which is really what the unions want so they have a means to deduct union dues) they should have been seeking the ability to hold onto their scholarships indefinitely to use as they wish. They played in the CHL for how ever many years, let them have that many years education paid for however they see fit. They earned it.
Look at Luke Opilka in Kitchener. He just announced his retirement from hockey. Sure he signed an NHL entry-level deal but never played a game in the NHL. I doubt if he drew a paycheck in the AHL this year due to injury. Here's an example of a player who, from what I understand after talking to a source (who may or may not be right), will not be able to have his education paid for because he signed an entry-level deal. This after playing in Kitchener for three years if you include last year where he couldn't play due to injury suffered at this level.
Instead of seeking a minimum wage (which is really what the unions want so they have a means to deduct union dues) they should have been seeking the ability to hold onto their scholarships indefinitely to use as they wish. They played in the CHL for how ever many years, let them have that many years education paid for however they see fit. They earned it.
capfriendy lists his signing bonus at $92,500USD per year for three years
not sure if he was able to collect year three but $185,000USD should help with tuition
not sure if he was able to collect year three but $185,000USD should help with tuition
Just to keep it in perspective, that's what, $140k-160k after taxes? 4 years at higher end private schools in the states can run in $200k+ range. State schools can eat up $120k of that. Sure, that will absolutely go a long way towards helping pay for school and if he was smart, he'll be fine. He won't be driving a Ferrari and living like a king though.
Knights players ecstatic that they won't be taking a pay cut
Rubbers29
Registered User
- Jan 9, 2012
- 710
- 498
I know you love to harp on the Knights and think it’s funny to get your digs in when you can but last I checked the ESA doesn’t have a maximum wage, if this can of worms was opened and seeing that the OHL doesn’t have a CBA with their players realistically the Knights would be free to pay players whatever the hell they please. How many players do you think would hold out to go to London, or Windsor or any other successful franchise that can afford to pay them...
EvenSteven
Registered User
- Sep 3, 2009
- 7,482
- 6,441
Further,
I am of the believe that if an OHL player plays for x amount of seasons, he earns that many years of paid education to do with as he sees fit. Remember, this paid education is supposed to be in lieu of pay if you listen to David Branch.
Therefore, (using past Ranger players) if my name is Matt Grennier and I've punched 4 years at this level, I'm going to play CIS hockey and get my schooling paid for thanks to my four years service in the OHL.
But also, if my name is Derek Roy, and I play four years in this league, and sign an entry level deal (as he did), I should still have the paid education under my belt since, according to David Branch, I earned it in lieu of pay. That means that that paid education should be able to be transferred to perhaps a brother, sister, etc or if nothing else, awarded as a scholarship in his name to a worthy recipient.
Sure this would be more expensive for the teams than what they are paying now, but I have to go back to what David Branch keeps saying: these paid educations are earned by these players in lieu of pay.
Or
Or a general fund that gets distributed equally among all teams to help cover scholarship costs. The NFL's model of profit sharing amongst teams really helped get them to where they are today.
EvenSteven
Registered User
- Sep 3, 2009
- 7,482
- 6,441
If I'm not mistaken, I believe teams already have to submit funds to the league and then the league distributes the funds to the eligible players. I believe this came into being after the issue a few years ago with a player from I believe Kingston who had to legally go after Kingston and the OHL to get the team to fund his education. I believe the player might've been Brody Todd but I'm not 100% on that. And I'm pretty sure he played with Kingston but he may have played with other team(s) as well.
Someone may correct me on the name and teams involved. But I'm pretty sure this was the case that caused teams to have to send funds to the league for the league to distribute.
That being said, I do not believe funds go into one big pool, league wide, for the league to distribute. I believe each team has to submit funds to the league as their players reach the requirements to qualify for education. In other words, as soon as a rookie plays his first OHL game, one year's education goes to the league in his name. Ditto every year after.
Again, I may be corrected on the particulars.
Someone may correct me on the name and teams involved. But I'm pretty sure this was the case that caused teams to have to send funds to the league for the league to distribute.
That being said, I do not believe funds go into one big pool, league wide, for the league to distribute. I believe each team has to submit funds to the league as their players reach the requirements to qualify for education. In other words, as soon as a rookie plays his first OHL game, one year's education goes to the league in his name. Ditto every year after.
Again, I may be corrected on the particulars.
ohloutsider
Registered User
Money does end up in a league "pool", but I am also not sure how that gets payed out. Also thought a rule change came in a couple of years ago that players funds were held for 3 years. Players were now allowed to "try" the pros and if it didn't pan out they could claim their education package before the 3 year window. My take on it was for every year a player played pro 1 year was deducted from the OHL education package. After 3 years of pro they could not claim any funds. I'm sure someone has more insight into this than me and can advise.
..not all players are students...if they go into the trades like my son they get/got nothing....league charged 20 dollars to see him play..he got pizza money and a place to sleep..
Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
Can you clarify? How old was he? Did he graduate high school? Was the education money not available to him? Or was it available and he chose not to use it?
..played 3 years in the league including overage….no money offered for trade school...played 3 years minor pro so I guess 18 month limit kicked in...
Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
OHL teams may not be making profits but "gifting" car loans to players on a teams dime will surely get some legal attention (especially when the league is saying the teams are broke...), among other things.
If a team is in the red only because they're intentionally trying to bleed money and recruit players any and every way possible (following the rules or not, the discussion through the league and forums following Ice Dogs Sanction is that "everyone is breaking the rules and only the dumb get caught") is that the responsibility on the league? The individual teams? The players? Or the fans for supporting the league monetarily through all this?
If a team is in the red only because they're intentionally trying to bleed money and recruit players any and every way possible (following the rules or not, the discussion through the league and forums following Ice Dogs Sanction is that "everyone is breaking the rules and only the dumb get caught") is that the responsibility on the league? The individual teams? The players? Or the fans for supporting the league monetarily through all this?
where will this end. If Juniors are deemed to be employees then maybe it backs up into midget, bantam, peewee levels as well. Minimum wage levels and all of the applicable payroll charges would greatly increase the costs for all teams. This court action could be huge and be the end for the low profit/attendance teams. OHL as we know it would change with teams folding & then there would be less opportunity for eligible kids. Also I doubt that NHL would financially support all 60 CHL teams so be careful what you ask for............
It’s a simple concept really. You know what you are signing up for when you sign the card. If you don’t like it don’t sign There will be thousands more that will gladly take your spot.
Living Vicariously
Registered User
I find it mesmerizing that players who played but a few games in the OHL were behind the original law suit. Talk about feeling entitled....
EvenSteven
Registered User
- Sep 3, 2009
- 7,482
- 6,441
Thousands more? I remember when the OHL was a 10 team league. This product is already watered down enough.
How many people do you think will pay go to the games if you get down to the deep recesses of the thousands of players that you're talking about?
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
HC Dynamo Pardubice @ Ocelari Trinec - Pardubice leads series 3-2Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Tappara Tampere @ Pelicans Lahti - Tappara leads series 2-1Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Eisbaren Berlin @ Pinguins Bremerhaven - Eisbaren Berlin leads series 3-1Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated:
-
