Don, I Don't Think This Cone Of Silence Is Working (CBA & Lockout Discussion) XXIV

[Tra La La]

Again with the bolding. Your response makes no sense whatsoever. This particular point that I bolded (unbolded), italicized and underlined is a blatent, obnoxious misrepresentation of the unions position.

Where specifically is the league shorting the players on make whole? They're not.

 

[King Woodballs]

It is absolutely true. Gary Bettman announced a lockout and killed hockey. What BS are you selling? Take it elsewhere.

Do you have any idea how many times the nhl asked the pa to negociate prior to the end of the cba
Dating all the way back to last november
So putting no blame on the players for this lockout is ridiculous

 

[Powdered Toast Man]

WOW, BECAUSE the league was trying to get the PA to negotiate before sept 15 so they would have a deal done......but FEHR refused to negotiate......thus leading to the lockout!!!

I imagine whatever the offer the owners were prepared to make during the summer wouldn't have been worth the paper it was written on. Traditionally, I don't reckon deals often get made where neither side has any real leverage.

They both realized that, why don't you?

 

[W75]

I know, I'm able to dislike both sides. It just depends which side expresses more stupid or absurd claims and demands. But how can some of you really like and root for one or the other? Do you know them personally?

 

[MikeK]

That ends it.

Both sides can not shut up long enough to negotiate. The silence, which was bringing positive vibes and hope for the fans gets shattered after 4 days of talks.

They are TOTALLY hopeless. Get a ****ing mediator.

O don't think the PA has any interest in a mediator. It seems as though they have had an agenda the entire time and it wasn't trying to get a deal done. I think this was about sticking it to the owners and getting Bettman's head in the process.

I hope this blows back in the players faces. I hope the owners stick it to them and cancel the season then open up camp next year for any players who want jobs.

 

[meedle]

I know, I'm able to dislike both sides. It just depends which side expresses more stupid or absurd claims and demands. But how can some of you really like and root for one or the other? Do you know them personally?

The owner keeps the team in my city.

 

[W75]

The owner keeps the team in my city.

Okay. That is fair. Very relevant point.

 

[PBPantherfan]

Apples and oranges. In a capitalist democracy people are free to earn whatever they can. If this weren't true then people would never have been able to accumulate the wealth to own hockey teams.

With their wealth people can buy different things. One guy is in the wealth range to buy a motor scooter while another can buy a Ferari. Both would feel the same sense of loss if their buying power was curtailed by their boss arbitrarily lowering their wages. This could be very, very problematic if either was unable to continue a payment they had contracted to do. But then in the Bettman fantasy world one can just change contract values at a whim.

I think I'll call my bank tomorrow and tell them to reduce the value of the money I borrowed and spent by 25%. Then I'll call my boss and tell him to pay me 25% more. Must be nice.

You are right people are allowed to earn whatever they can in the industry they choose. If you choose to be an NHL player you have to get paid by that industries rules. There are plenty of industries that have pay scales for certain positions why should they NHL be any different if that is what the owners feel they need to do to make the business be profitable. If the players don't like the NHL pay scale go play somewhere else after all it is a free capitalist society. If they don't like the NHL pay go earn more somewhere else. No one is forcing them to play for the NHL its the players choice to be there.

And a guy making 50K losing 10% is affected a lot worse than a guy making 5 million going to 4.5 million. At 50K that 5K can mean having a place to live or health insurance ETC. If you are making 5 million and then go to 4.5 million and lose your house you really need a better financial advisor.

 

[Dalton]

Do you have any idea how many times the nhl asked the pa to negociate prior to the end of the cba
Dating all the way back to last november
So putting no blame on the players for this lockout is ridiculous

Your neighbor won't turn down the radio. You break down his door and do it for him. The police arrest you. You argue that it was the neighbors fault for not turning down his radio. You go to jail. You discover that in the eyes of society you are responsible for your own actions.

Bettman stopped hockey. No one made him do it. He is responsible for his own actions. the 'just following orders' defence was discredited in the late 40's.

 

[JAX]

I imagine whatever the offer the owners were prepared to make during the summer wouldn't have been worth the paper it was written on. Traditionally, I don't reckon deals often get made where neither side has any real leverage.

They both realized that, why don't you?

It's a starting point if nothing else, I realize Fehr has no intention of getting a deal done before dec, but the point I was making is that he tries to use "the owners lockout" as a PR phrase.

 

[pepty]

His job is to negotiate, go to players, say "the NHL offered this deal, is it fair? Do we accept? If not, what would you like changed?" Not "the NHL offered this, it's not fair, you shouldn't accept, do we accept?" The players know what they want, and it's their finances. Fehr has absolutely no business assessing the fairness of the offers. It should be:

"the owners offered:

-50/50
-this type of make whole
-etc

With no opinion attached.

A lot of the push back from the PA about communicating with the players has been off the mark.

They are arguing that Fehr keeps the lines of communications open and notifies the players by email etc of what is happening whereas Goodenow evidently did not.

The league is not saying that they are not communicating with the players, but that they are not accurately presenting the offers as they are heavily edited and with a strong negative spin as you say.

In reading Fehrs memo to the players and the PA response to the Russo article.it would seem they have a point.

Friedmans article:
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opinion/2012/11/gloves-are-off-between-nhl-players-union.html

One of the issues is that the NHL feels it has made a significant offer to take ownership of the "make-whole" provision, the most critical step in getting the revenue share to a 50/50 split. Several other reports pegged the amount at $211 million US plus interest.

That specific fact was not included in Fehr's note to the membership. One player and one agent said the omission was because of a belief the memo would be leaked; the NHLPA did not want to be responsible for an NHL proposal being made public

In his press conference Fehr said that they didn't include it because you cant put everything in one memo!

So therefore he filed the memo with spin and left out the meat of the offer.

 

[LPHabsFan]

What has that got to do with Bettman locking out the players and being solely responsible for no hockey being played?

Are you really hashing out that argument again? There has already been too much discussion over who started the lockout first and why. I think there's an entire thread on it if you want.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Do you have an explanation how the league can fully cover the transition from 57-50% on make whole. But is 600 million short supposedly on make whole? What is it the league isn't paying back? I'm open to logical, reasonable, transparent, ideas.

I believe its coming from anticipated growth in future years. The first two years would not be covered but with the NHLs "conservative" growth projections, 50% of revenue three years from now should equal today's player share of $1.8 billion. then in future years additional growth in revenue would allow the players to be repaid this amount they lost.

 

[PBPantherfan]

His job is to negotiate, go to players, say "the NHL offered this deal, is it fair? Do we accept? If not, what would you like changed?" Not "the NHL offered this, it's not fair, you shouldn't accept, do we accept?" The players know what they want, and it's their finances. Fehr has absolutely no business assessing the fairness of the offers. It should be:

"the owners offered:

-50/50
-this type of make whole
-etc

With no opinion attached.

As much as I hate Fehr this post is pretty bad. So what the players are paying a guy millions of dollars to be a secretary? That's asinie. He is their rep they're paying him to get the best contract they can. Why the hell would analysing and telling the players whether it is a good deal or not be part of his job?

 

[King Woodballs]

Your neighbor won't turn down the radio. You break down his door and do it for him. The police arrest you. You argue that it was the neighbors fault for not turning down his radio. You go to jail. You discover that in the eyes of society you are responsible for your own actions.

Bettman stopped hockey. No one made him do it. He is responsible for his own actions. the 'just following orders' defence was discredited in the late 40's.

So bettman is supposed to let the players play with no cba?
I guess you don't know what fehr did in 1994 then.

 

[Dalton]

You are right people are allowed to earn whatever they can in the industry they choose. If you choose to be an NHL player you have to get paid by that industries rules. There are plenty of industries that have pay scales for certain positions why should they NHL be any different if that is what the owners feel they need to do to make the business be profitable. If the players don't like the NHL pay scale go play somewhere else after all it is a free capitalist society. If they don't like the NHL pay go earn more somewhere else. No one is forcing them to play for the NHL its the players choice to be there.

And a guy making 50K losing 10% is affected a lot worse than a guy making 5 million going to 4.5 million. At 50K that 5K can mean having a place to live or health insurance ETC. If you are making 5 million and then go to 4.5 million and lose your house you really need a better financial advisor.

If the owner can't afford to pay his employees he's free to find something else to own. Baseball? Poker? Oh yeah I forgot, NHL owners feel entitled to cut everyone's pay whenever they feel like it.

 

[Jack de la Hoya]

Allan Walsh ‏@walsha
Don Fehr on charge by NHL that he did not relay offer to players. "It's laughable really that they (NHL) would resort to tactics like this."

**** just hit the fan.

I'll just say this: Regardless of how you feel about the state and direction of the negotiations, the NHL's claims last night on this point were not simply patently unbelievable, but also a pretty stark invocation of an anti-union trope that emphasizes the chasm between "good" workers and "bad" union leaders.

 

[King Woodballs]

If the owner can't afford to pay his employees he's free to find something else to own. Baseball? Poker? Oh yeah I forgot, NHL owners feel entitled to cut everyone's pay whenever they feel like it.

Any business can do that

 

[Boot]

So bettman is supposed to let the players play with no cba?
I guess you don't know what fehr did in 1994 then.

Seriously. Protecting themselves from getting completely screwed over is not the same as someone breaking and entering someone else's home. I mean, not even remotely the same.

And besides, the NHLPA wouldn't negotiate during last season, why would they negotiate during this one?

 

[Freudian]

I posted a link to an article in the Globe and Mail that quoted Fehr saying this.

Apparently the article about the negotiations that leaves this out was from the New York Post.

"There was also controversy over what the players are said to be asking in the first year of a new agreement. The New York Post reported the union demanded the $1.883-million in salaries the players received in the 2011-12 season when they received 57 per cent of HRR, plus five per cent more to account for revenue growth. There were reports this was demanded even if the league is unable to play a full 82-game schedule this season.

Fehr said the players are seeking $1.883-billion but only an additional 1.75 per cent per year, which would be compounded over the length of the agreement. He said the union was not actually looking for this amount this season, it just wanted to establish it as part of a new economic system. Once that was done, the player salaries would be pro-rated for this season to account for any lost revenue because of a lockout-shortened schedule."

That is not a quote.

What Fehr actually when asked about not being able to play a full season and the impact it has on the numbers he replied:

"we would look at the structure of the agreement based upon what their presumed growth rates were and see if on that basis we were close enough to see if we would be in the same ballpark, the same arena and we would then deal with with the lockout issues afterwards. Based on their reactions today that I don't fully understand, they are not willing to do that".

At no point did Fehr say the NHLPA claim they would be fine with prorated contracts for this season.

 

[santiclaws]

So bettman is supposed to let the players play with no cba?
I guess you don't know what fehr did in 1994 then.

You sign a one-page agreement that the players won't strike. Done.

 

[Dalton]

So bettman is supposed to let the players play with no cba?
I guess you don't know what fehr did in 1994 then.

Fehr had a few union negotiations conducted while the league continued to play. That is in the players interest. In 1994 it was clear that the owners were colluding. The players struck in protest and won a court battle proving their case.

I love all this disinformation. But its late here in the communist country I live, play and work in. Goodnight. Have fun. Gary is thinking of you in his prayers.

 

[MikeK]

You sign a one-page agreement that the players won't strike. Done.

I doubt they would even be able to agree on what color pen to be used.

 

[Boot]

You sign a one-page agreement that the players won't strike. Done.

They also signed an agreement that their salaries would be dictated by whatever the current CBA was. That doesn't seem to really matter at the moment, does it? They were *guaranteed* that!

 

[Dalton]

That is not a quote.

What Fehr actually when asked about not being able to play a full season and the impact it has on the numbers he replied:

"we would look at the structure of the agreement based upon what their presumed growth rates were and see if on that basis we were close enough to see if we would be in the same ballpark, the same arena and we would then deal with with the lockout issues afterwards. Based on their reactions today that I don't fully understand, they are not willing to do that".

At no point did Fehr say the NHLPA claim they would be fine with prorated contracts for this season.

Except in the quoted statement above witnessed by reporters and players.