Class action lawsuits filed against OHL, QMJHL, & WHL

[gstommylee]

Well, the NLRB has ruled that "amateur" NCAA athletes meet the definition of employees under the NLRA, granting Northwestern football players the right to unionize (that ruling is under appeal).

I don't know if there was a thread on this last year (a quick search didn't find one) - but 34 minor league baseball players are suing MLB, claiming that some minor league salaries violate federal and state minimum wage laws. The case is set for trial in 2017.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/03/minor-league-baseball-players-lawsuit-mlb-mlbpa



http://www.si.com/mlb/2014/02/12/minor-league-baseball-players-lawsuit
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/baseball-broshuis-minor-league-wage-income

http://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn.orrick.com/files/Senne-v-MLB.pdf

MLB and the minor league system is completely different issue.

NCAA players get so much compensation they are almost considered as employees in one respect. NCAA is a whole separate can of worms than what is going on here.

Like i brought up there are soccer leagues where under law are recognized as amateurs. As long as the club or league are deemed amateurs imo than they aren't subject to labor and wage laws.

But if you want to force WHL to pay their players a wage then you got to do with all sports too in this country imo and something like that is not going to happen.

 

[Grudy0]

Grudy0,

If they are deemed by law as amateurs, then you can not apply labor laws or wage laws.

There are other sports leagues that players are amateurs.

If said club or league is deemed professional. AHL, NHL for example then they have to be paid a salary.

I think you are missing my point:

I can start a team within a league. I can completely depress any salaries by calling it amateur. And then if I get hauled into court because my players think they're employees under the law, and the court rules in favor of the players, then by law they'd no longer be amateurs.

That's what's currently going on. And the only issue with the proposed State of Washington law is that it doesn't exempt a court finding that the WHL players are employees.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

I think you are missing my point:

I can start a team within a league. I can completely depress any salaries by calling it amateur. And then if I get hauled into court because my players think they're employees under the law, and the court rules in favor of the players, then by law they'd no longer be amateurs.

That's what's currently going on. And the only issue with the proposed State of Washington law is that it doesn't exempt a court finding that the WHL players are employees.

I don't know the specifics re Washington state - but in Ontario, if the legislature enacted a law re the definition of employees or a law that precluded certain categories of people from being employees - those people couldn't just turn around and sue on the basis they were employees.

Admittedly, I'm not all that familiar re US law, esp re the interaction of fed/state law (which strikes me as more complicated that provincial/fed law in Canada). But here, if, for example, the Ont. legislature enacted a law saying "OHL players =/= employees for the purpose of the Employment Standards Act", those players couldn't just start suing and say "no, really, we're employees" - they would actually have to challenge the legislation itself.

 

[gstommylee]

I don't know the specifics re Washington state - but in Ontario, if the legislature enacted a law re the definition of employees or a law that precluded certain categories of people from being employees - those people couldn't just turn around and sue on the basis they were employees.

Admittedly, I'm not all that familiar re US law, esp re the interaction of fed/state law (which strikes me as more complicated that provincial/fed law in Canada). But here, if, for example, the Ont. legislature enacted a law saying "OHL players =/= employees for the purpose of the Employment Standards Act", those players couldn't just start suing and say "no, really, we're employees" - they would actually have to challenge the legislation itself.

Yep that would be the same they would have to argue that the bill is constitutionally illegal which won't happen.

 

[Grudy0]

I don't know the specifics re Washington state - but in Ontario, if the legislature enacted a law re the definition of employees or a law that precluded certain categories of people from being employees - those people couldn't just turn around and sue on the basis they were employees.

In Canada, the provinces get to set and regulate labor laws. Canada doesn't have a federal minimum wage law, other than deferring to the provincial law...

Admittedly, I'm not all that familiar re US law, esp re the interaction of fed/state law (which strikes me as more complicated that provincial/fed law in Canada). But here, if, for example, the Ont. legislature enacted a law saying "OHL players =/= employees for the purpose of the Employment Standards Act", those players couldn't just start suing and say "no, really, we're employees" - they would actually have to challenge the legislation itself.

And that would be true in Ontario.

Yep that would be the same they would have to argue that the bill is constitutionally illegal which won't happen.

No, the players would simply have to win the battle that they are involved in interstate commerce, so that the federal Fair Labor Standards Act should apply to them. That would mean the federal minimum wage rate would apply.

 

[BadgerBruce]

Rick Westhead (TSN) on some of the political games over the past 10 months or so.
http://www.tsn.ca/union-alleges-intimidation-after-minister-orders-ohl-examination-1.263866

 

[Cgytall121]

Rick Westhead (TSN) on some of the political games over the past 10 months or so.
http://www.tsn.ca/union-alleges-intimidation-after-minister-orders-ohl-examination-1.263866

Typical union bs. Stomp your feet and accuse if you dont get your way. So we have yet to see any government on either border take any steps in their direction (unionization and or employee declaration), or any significant interest from players to follow their lead, so what does that say about the topic haha. Is it dragging their feet, or maybe it's that they just flat out dont agree.

We're left with a class action lawsuit, basically a quest for $$, that has no public backing other then a law firm and 2 players. i'll say no more, its comically stupid haha.

And why is it, and i'll qualify this by saying i've only followed this from a distance, that the only reporter who is covering this stuff in Ontario is Rick Westhead from TSN. I just googled the topic, and literally nothing other than Washington news outlets reporting the bill passing. I'll take this more seriously when people other than this union and the lawsuit guys do...and rick westhead haha

 

[gstommylee]

Typical union bs. Stomp your feet and accuse if you dont get your way. So we have yet to see any government on either border take any steps in their direction (unionization and or employee declaration), or any significant interest from players to follow their lead, so what does that say about the topic haha. Is it dragging their feet, or maybe it's that they just flat out dont agree.

We're left with a class action lawsuit, basically a quest for $$, that has no public backing other then a law firm and 2 players. i'll say no more, its comically stupid haha.

Then in Washington state the bill to declare jr hockey players as amateurs is waiting the governor's signature.

 

[Cgytall121]

Then in Washington state the bill to declare jr hockey players as amateurs is waiting the governor's signature.

haha ya, good point. govt's literally going in the opposite direction of their beliefs. Says something.

 

[BadgerBruce]

i'll qualify this by saying i've only followed this from a distance, that the only reporter who is covering this stuff in Ontario is Rick Westhead from TSN. I just googled the topic, and literally nothing other than Washington news outlets reporting the bill passing. I'll take this more seriously when people other than this union and the lawsuit guys do...and rick westhead haha

If you review the entirety of this thread, you will find links to a variety of sources other than Rick Westhead. The Toronto Star, for instance, provided initial coverage, and others followed.

One commonality in the coverage provided by the more well-known media outlets is the inclusion of legal opinions on the issue. There is unanimity here -- the CHL is on unsteady ground.

Has anyone found a published legal opinion suggesting the CHL is on solid ground? I've not encountered one, but I'd be interested if one exists.

 

[jason2020]

If you review the entirety of this thread, you will find links to a variety of sources other than Rick Westhead. The Toronto Star, for instance, provided initial coverage, and others followed.

One commonality in the coverage provided by the more well-known media outlets is the inclusion of legal opinions on the issue. There is unanimity here -- the CHL is on unsteady ground.

Has anyone found a published legal opinion suggesting the CHL is on solid ground? I've not encountered one, but I'd be interested if one exists.

You could say the players are in the same boat they want min wage for every hour there with the team would any court ever agree to that I would be shocked and then this idea they should get all back wages plus ei/cpp that they never paid into by the way the avg joe can't even get that.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

If you review the entirety of this thread, you will find links to a variety of sources other than Rick Westhead. The Toronto Star, for instance, provided initial coverage, and others followed.

One commonality in the coverage provided by the more well-known media outlets is the inclusion of legal opinions on the issue. There is unanimity here -- the CHL is on unsteady ground.

Has anyone found a published legal opinion suggesting the CHL is on solid ground? I've not encountered one, but I'd be interested if one exists.

I have not seen one. On a personal level, I don't see a tenable basis. I deal in employment law a bit with my job - but I work in house, not in private practice so don't deal with it in a focussed way. I've picked the brains of some friends, just because, in an intellectual sense I find the legal issues interesting - and am told from those who do employment in private practice that the players look a lot like employees and the CHL is on very weak legal footing. But you never can tell.

What I'm also interested in - and which hasn't been covered by the media at all (probably b/c it's not interesting to the general public) - is the class action aspect of this. None of the actions have gone through certification proceedings yet. I'm wondering how likely it is any of the actions get certified as class proceedings. On a brief look, i'd think they have a decent chance - but i'm certainly not that knowledgeable about that area.

 

[BadgerBruce]

I have not seen one. On a personal level, I don't see a tenable basis. I deal in employment law a bit with my job - but I work in house, not in private practice so don't deal with it in a focussed way. I've picked the brains of some friends, just because, in an intellectual sense I find the legal issues interesting - and am told from those who do employment in private practice that the players look a lot like employees and the CHL is on very weak legal footing. But you never can tell.

What I'm also interested in - and which hasn't been covered by the media at all (probably b/c it's not interesting to the general public) - is the class action aspect of this. None of the actions have gone through certification proceedings yet. I'm wondering how likely it is any of the actions get certified as class proceedings. On a brief look, i'd think they have a decent chance - but i'm certainly not that knowledgeable about that area.

My understanding is that the CHL is represented by Torys LLP, a fairly well known firm with extensive multi-jurisdictional class action expertise. However, in admittedly casual discussions with my organization's legal representatives (labour side), Torys also has a reputation for negotiating hard nosed settlements. Obviously, the firm takes direction from the client, but I did find this interesting.

http://www.torys.com/expertise/services/litigation-and-dispute-resolution/class-actions

As well, several legal opinions I've read deal with an issue I've long viewed as the elephant in the class action room: the CHL is simply an umbrella "association" and the 3 leagues/individual franchises are the actual employers of record.

 

[superdeluxe]

Washington State Bill going to be signed Monday and go into law:


Chris Daniels @ChrisDaniels5 · 11m 11 minutes ago

Governor Inslee is expected to sign SB 5893 at Monday afternoon ceremony, per spokesperson. Would classify WHL players as amateurs.

 

[Jeffrey93]

Has anyone found a published legal opinion suggesting the CHL is on solid ground? I've not encountered one, but I'd be interested if one exists.

Does the ground exist? Has anything like this situation come up before?

Where players of non-professional teams in non-professional leagues decide themselves that they are in fact professionals and require payment?

The entire world of amateur sports would be the ground the CHL would be on I suppose. Must be kind of solid...

 

[Kodi]

Washington Governor just signed SB 5893 classifying players in Washington as non-employees

 

[superdeluxe]

Now commence all the legal challenges. Will be interesting.

 

[gstommylee]

Now commence all the legal challenges. Will be interesting.

I am not sure how anyone can legally challenge the law based on constitutional grounds.

 

[PCSPounder]

The Fed will have their say, Tommy. It's coming up for college athletes, too.

 

[kdb209]

Now commence all the legal challenges. Will be interesting.

I am not sure how anyone can legally challenge the law based on constitutional grounds.

I can't see the basis for overturning it based on US or state constitutional grounds.

The only grounds I can see are either

- Retroactivity. Could the team/league be liable for violations which took place prior to the new law going into affect.

- State vs Federal labor law. Are the conditions in violation of the minimum wage and employee definition rules of the US Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) - in which case the actions would have to be refiled in Federal court.

 

[gstommylee]

I can't see the basis for overturning it based on US or state constitutional grounds.

The only grounds I can see are either

- Retroactivity. Could the team/league be liable for violations which took place prior to the new law going into affect.

- State vs Federal labor law. Are the conditions in violation of the minimum wage and employee definition rules of the US Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) - in which case the actions would have to be refiled in Federal court.

I do not see how any federal law applies here. There are soccer leagues where players are under similar age groups 16 and 17 but they are deemed amateurs. No one took that to federal court and try to challenge it.

If they are going to take it federal court and demand WHL pays their players minimal wage. It will kill the league in the US and any similar leagues that are also in the US. Then those amatuer soccer leagues and clubs will have to pay their players too.

 

[superdeluxe]

Here is the story by Chris Daniels

http://www.king5.com/story/sports/2015/05/18/governor-whl-hockey-sports-labor/27558325/

 

[LadyStanley]

http://www.whl.ca/article/governor-...ll-clarifying-whl-players-as-amateur-athletes

And the WHL release on Washington bill/law.

 

[superdeluxe]

The WHL commissioner said Saskatchewan also passed a similar bill, link to that?

 

[LadyStanley]

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/u...-washington-bill-making-whl-players-amateurs/

Unifor union president undeterred about unionizing CHL, even after Washington law defines them as amateurs.