CBA negotiations and related stuff
- Thread starter LadyStanley
- Start date
- Status
LadyStanley
Registered User
All quiet in NHL CBA talks: League, players association reportedly haven't held face-to-face meetings in months
No "substantial" discussions since September.
No "substantial" discussions since September.
LadyStanley
Registered User
LadyStanley
Registered User
CBJWerenski8
Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
- Jun 13, 2009
- 42,330
- 24,249
LeHab
Registered User
- Aug 31, 2005
- 15,957
- 6,259
As part of CBA both parties are discussing a plan for international games which may contain Olympics. IOC/IIHF has recently announced intentions to accommodate additional requests from NHL however a lot more needs to be done.
https://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympics/nhl-olympic-participation-2020-beijing-1.5459117
How much players are willing to give up in CBA negotiations for the Olympics is the question.
LadyStanley
Registered User
LadyStanley
Registered User
LadyStanley
Registered User
Paywall
NSS. Other than getting back to business as usual, of course that's the highest long term issue.
Still a lot of transition rules and critical dates for 19-20 & 20-21 seasons to work through first.
LadyStanley
Registered User
High priority because both sides believe they have leverage.
Owners think they have it because it will be a de facto lockout with escrow hanging over players and the back to work orders/breach of contract angles in play.
Players feel they have it due to cash flow issues putting teams at risk next year.
That both sides have avoided paragraph 17 of the SPC is head scratching, as it’s the most direct way to handle any short term revenue shortfalls.
If the players aren't careful especially after coming off the whole virus issue they are going to leverage themselves right into another lockout.
Ernie
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2004
- 12,825
- 2,272
For most teams the cash flow issues are worse if they have to pay players without any gate revenue. Very few, if any, have broadcast contracts that would allow them to break even in such a scenario.
Meanwhile the players have mortgages and are seeing prime earning years disappear.
Is it? Escrow was a dirty word for the players before this and if there's a solution, it's going to be easier to sell if they can find some way of rebranding it somehow.
It won’t be easier to sell, but it’s in their contract. Neither side wants to go there, that’s why both sides would rather start in December than on time behind closed doors. Paragraph as follows, subsection C the one at issue.
————
17. If because of any condition arising from a state of war or other cause beyond the control of the League or of the Club, it shall be deemed advisable by the League or the Club to suspend or cease or reduce operations, then:
(a) in the event of suspension of operations, the Player shall be entitled only to the proportion of Paragraph 1 Salary due at the date of suspension,
(b) in the event of cessation of operations, the Paragraph 1 Salary shall be automatically canceled on the date of cessation, and
(c) in the event of reduction of operations, the Paragraph 1 Salary shall be replaced by that mutually agreed upon between the Club and the Player, or, in the absence of mutual agreement, by that determined by neutral arbitration.
————-
If the league is losing 2/3 of revenue due to no gate receipts, the teams won’t have the money to pay salaries long enough to see the return of escrow monies.
mouser
Business of Hockey
It's really not important to invoke Paragraph 17 at this time. Escrow will solve it all.
Besides the league wants to resume play this season. Even if paragraph 17 were invoked now, everything still has to be negotiated with the PA to resume play.
Besides the league wants to resume play this season. Even if paragraph 17 were invoked now, everything still has to be negotiated with the PA to resume play.
Ernie
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2004
- 12,825
- 2,272
At this point we can't go by the CBA, we're in uncharted territory here, and the CBA wasn't really made for this situation. Every decision in the next year will have to be done hand in hand with the NHLPA. Should be.. interesting.
Considering they have force manure language in the SPC that was collectively bargained, the CBA was built for situations like this; it’s just that hammering out the issue of the payouts from having to play behind closed doors next season is a can both sides want to kick down the road.
LadyStanley
Registered User
Why NHL players deferring final paychecks might be a good thing - TheHockeyNews
Campbell reports NHLPA voting this weekend to possibly further delay final RS paychecks (worth about $120m), and why they might so vote.
So, that would leave an expected shortfall of ~$700m. Half of that is $350m, less the $120m owed, and you're looking at $230m the players would have to come up with.
Meanwhile, the owners have the $1.15B coming from the VGK and upcoming Seattle expansions.
So, perhaps there can be CBA "peace" and that $230m spread out over multiple seasons. Or used as a bargaining chip in the CBA negotiations for longer term.
Interesting. Nice to see some $$s bantied about.
Campbell reports NHLPA voting this weekend to possibly further delay final RS paychecks (worth about $120m), and why they might so vote.
So, that would leave an expected shortfall of ~$700m. Half of that is $350m, less the $120m owed, and you're looking at $230m the players would have to come up with.
Meanwhile, the owners have the $1.15B coming from the VGK and upcoming Seattle expansions.
So, perhaps there can be CBA "peace" and that $230m spread out over multiple seasons. Or used as a bargaining chip in the CBA negotiations for longer term.
Interesting. Nice to see some $$s bantied about.
LadyStanley
Registered User
Yes. Last payment was made in March 2017. But it's still recent that some may not have spent it (all).
LadyStanley
Registered User
Ernie
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2004
- 12,825
- 2,272
From the Athletic (paywall):
Seven CBA changes NHL team executives have discussed (and...
Obviously it's a bit of a pipe dream that they'll get everything they want, but perhaps they can use the uncertain finances to their advantage, ie trading some short term revenue for longer term CBA changes.
Seven CBA changes NHL team executives have discussed (and...
1. Signing bonus limits (limiting the amount of a contract that can be paid out in signing bonuses)
2. Flattening contract annual salaries (no more front loading or back loading or loading up payments on potential lockout years)
3. Contract term limits (decreasing the maximum length of contracts from 7/8 years)
4. Reforming trade protection clauses (limiting the circumstances of when players can get NMC's, NTC's)
5. Fixing arbitration (changing the format so the arbitrator picks one side instead of finding a number in the middle)
6. Fixing long-term injured reserve (instead of the complicated rules, allow teams to take injured players off of their cap number)
7. Compensatory draft picks (more opportunities for teams to get picks when they choose not to sign players)
2. Flattening contract annual salaries (no more front loading or back loading or loading up payments on potential lockout years)
3. Contract term limits (decreasing the maximum length of contracts from 7/8 years)
4. Reforming trade protection clauses (limiting the circumstances of when players can get NMC's, NTC's)
5. Fixing arbitration (changing the format so the arbitrator picks one side instead of finding a number in the middle)
6. Fixing long-term injured reserve (instead of the complicated rules, allow teams to take injured players off of their cap number)
7. Compensatory draft picks (more opportunities for teams to get picks when they choose not to sign players)
Obviously it's a bit of a pipe dream that they'll get everything they want, but perhaps they can use the uncertain finances to their advantage, ie trading some short term revenue for longer term CBA changes.
LadyStanley
Registered User
Players seem to want: Olympic participation, escrow "fixed" (might be moot point for a couple of seasons), easing pain of pandemic escrow bite.
- Status
