Breaking News-PA and NHL meeting this week

[Bicycle Repairman]

If the NHLPA expelled 50.1+% of the lowest payed members for crossing then those 50.1+% percent of players would be very annoyed. A union is elected by a majority of the workforce, union and non-union members can vote. Those 50.1+% would be free to hold a vote on whether or not the NHLPA is their representitive union.

How are they going to vote to change bargaining agents if they've been kicked out of the bargaining unit?

 

[SPARTAKUS*]

Hands up for people who care?

I certainly dont! they've ruined hockey for me. Go Raptors! Go Bosh!


I hate Goodenow like i hate Bush!

So why do you take the time to come here then? Go watch basketball and leave us alone with your whinning. I respect your point of view but it infuriates me when I read all those posters who says I am done with the NHL. But day after day they keep coming back here to whine. What's up with that???

 

[no13matssundin]

If the NHL, and not the NHLPA, are the ones who are starting the talks, then this will go nowhere. The PA are too silly to see a good deal in front of them... itll have to be the PA to start the process ( a real one, not a fake one to try and make the NHL and two of its greatest players look bad for PR purposes)

Until the PA realizes its got no leverage and chooses to take it up the butt, there will be no movement.

 

[MeatTornado]

I will be totally pissed off actually if this meeting leads to a deal soon (which it wont, imo). Why now and not a month ago? will be the question everyone will demand be answered.

more like why now, and not like 7 months ago. they should have never let any games go down the drain... honestly, where was this urgency in August/September?

 

[me2]

How are they going to vote to change bargaining agents if they've been kicked out of the bargaining unit?

They would cease to be union members, but they would still be a part of the bargaining unit (all employees represented by the union in this case, whether or not they are union members). Bob isn't going to be able to argue they belong in a different bargaining unit, they are all hockey players, its the same job.

Bargaining Unit
A bargaining unit is a group of employees found appropriate for representation by FLRA and voted upon by employees who are represented by a labor union in their dealings with agency management. Bargaining unit status pertains solely to the positions employees hold within the agency. Employees are either in a bargaining unit (bargaining unit members) or are excluded based on the unit definition or stutory exclusion.

Employees may elect to join the union and pay union dues. Such employees are union members in addition to being members of the bargaining unit. A union that has been accorded representational rights over a bargaining unit must represent all employees covered by that bargaining unit, regardless of whether or not they pay union dues. This is known as the duty of fair representation.

http://www.umbc.edu/collectivebargaining/glossary.html
Bargaining Agent
A labor organization that is the exclusive representative of all employees in a bargaining unit, both union and non-union members


All employees can vote in a decertification election, union and non-union. The NHLPA no longer be the NHL players bargaining agent. Bob gets the sack.

http://www.labour.gov.bc.ca/certification/qa.htm
What if the employees no longer want to be unionized? (decertification)

A group of employees who wish to decertify can apply to do so through the Board. A decertification application cannot be filed until at least 10 months after the date of certification. At least 45 percent of the employees in the bargaining unit must sign forms supporting decertification – a secret-ballot vote is then held with all employees able to vote, whether or not they signed the form to decertify. The Board may refuse to decertify the union without holding a vote if it is proven that the employer caused the decertification application.

http://www.canadianlawsite.com/unions.htm

The OLRB deals with a DECERTIFICATION
APPLICATION in two stages:

*
First, the OLRB decides, based on the evidence
filed with the DECERTIFICATION APPLICATION,
whether it appears that at least 40 per cent of
employees in the bargaining unit no longer wish to
be represented by the union. If so, the OLRB orders
a secret ballot vote of all bargaining unit employees,
normally held within five to seven days of the
DECERTIFICATION APPLICATION (not including
Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays).
*
If a vote is ordered and more than 50 per cent
of the votes cast are in favour of decertification, the
OLRB will declare that the union no longer represents
the employees in the bargaining unit.


http://www.nrtw.org/d/decert.htm

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

They would cease to be union members, but they would still be a part of the bargaining unit (all employees represented by the union in this case, whether or not they are union members).

They're going to decertify and form a new union?

Wouldn't it be easier to vote in a new executive while they're still members in good standing?

 

[me2]

They're going to decertify and form a new union?

This is a hypothetical about what would happen if a great mass of players got expelled for crossing during impasse.

see "secondly, what makes you think those players will break rank with their union ? the union can permamently kick them out and once the stalemate is broken, they will never be allowed back in the union. which means they lose rights to merchandise profits, pension benefits and all the other perks that the union has."

Hypothetically they cross over at 20+ a day for 3 weeks and as they crossed over got expelled. That way there wouldn't be a trigger point.

We are dealing in fanciful hypothetical situations. The NHLPA wouldn't kick out more than 50% of players it would be suicide.

Wouldn't it be easier to vote in a new executive while they're still members in good standing?

Yes, but these are hockey players not brain surgeons or McDonalds workers, they probably wouldn't think of it.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Christmas in March for the players. They have yet another chance to get a good deal if they have the brains to reach out and take it. Anyone want to lay odds on their collective brain power?

While discussions are returning to square one, sources say the league is still willing to offer a hard cap without a link to revenues, if the two sides get a deal in place by June 1. If there's no agreement by then, the link will be back on the table.

"The league wants something in place by June 1 so they can try to get their business in order," said a league source last night. "That means they have to get to work now, if there's any hope something is going to be done.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/OttawaSun/Sports/2005/03/08/953459-sun.html

 

[Leafer4Life]

Well their going to be meeting on Friday March 11th:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/article.jsp?content=20050307_094304_5132

 

[Boltsfan2029]

This certainly isn't going to help...

The union has pulled its offer of a 24% rollback on all existing contracts off the table, which means the league can't count on $239 million (all terms US) in givebacks the NHLPA claimed it would provide.

 

[ColoradoHockeyFan]

This certainly isn't going to help...

The union has pulled its offer of a 24% rollback on all existing contracts off the table, which means the league can't count on $239 million (all terms US) in givebacks the NHLPA claimed it would provide.

At what point in the life of existing contracts was that figure appropriate, though? In other words, as existing contracts expire, doesn't the rollback become less relevant?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

At what point in the life of existing contracts was that figure appropriate, though? In other words, as existing contracts expire, doesn't the rollback become less relevant?

Applies to something less than 290 contracts this upcoming year, about half of that the next year. So already pretty irrelevant. Add to that the fact that it could really divide the union. Have a hard Cap, and no roll back, and it leaves less for the over sixty percent of the league without contracts next year. It rises to over 80% of the league without contracts the year after. I would bet that those players without contracts will resent those without the roll back who do have contracts eating up what they could make.