NHL and NHLPA Meeting Dec. 9th

[Bicycle Repairman]

I wonder if the reason MLB was planning to have the Jays play out of Dunedin in 1995 was because they didn't know the answer either, and didn't want to risk having salary of union players imposed as damages in an unfair labour practices hearing?

The law in Ontario governing replacement workers has changed since then.

 

[mudcrutch79]

15. Thus, it is quite clear from the pertinent jurisprudence that this Board does not have jurisdiction over employees who are employed outside of Ontario. The Labour Relations Act contains no suggestion that it is intended to have application beyond the boundaries of Ontario, nor would the Ontario Legislature have the constitutional jurisdiction to enact labour legislation having extra-territorial effect (cf., the provisions of the Canada Labour Code as interpreted by the Canada Labour Relations Board and the Federal Court of Appeal in the jurisprudence summarized by that Board in Bell Canada, [1982] 3 Can. LRBR 113).

This statement comes from a OLRB decision regarding certification of a bargaining unit that included employees working outside of Ontario. In that case, the employer was based in Toronto-obviously that's not true for 28/30 NHL teams. I can't see that OLRB has jurisdiction to certify the NHLPA in this case.

There are obvious constitutional issues here, which were discussed throughout the case. That would mean that the law should be the same everywhere in Canada. The question then becomes if the OLRA applies bargaining units that aren't certified in the province. The same constitutional problems would seem to arise.

 

[mudcrutch79]

The law in Ontario governing replacement workers has changed since then.

Not really the point, but an excellent attempt.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

... I've convinced myself that the owners will not go for an impasse and have no intention of using or trying to use replacement players.

I agree with Tom. It's interesting though that people think the implied threat is enough to distract the NHLPA.

I think Goodenow calls the bluff.

 

[mudcrutch79]

I agree with Tom. It's interesting though that people think the implied threat is enough to distract the NHLPA.

I think it's worked on at least a portion of the NHLPA membership.

I think Goodenow calls the bluff.

We'll know soon hopefully. Each side will claim victory of course.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

This statement comes from a OLRB decision regarding certification of a bargaining unit that included employees working outside of Ontario. In that case, the employer was based in Toronto-obviously that's not true for 28/30 NHL teams. I can't see that OLRB has jurisdiction to certify the NHLPA in this case.

There are obvious constitutional issues here, which were discussed throughout the case. That would mean that the law should be the same everywhere in Canada. The question then becomes if the OLRA applies bargaining units that aren't certified in the province. The same constitutional problems would seem to arise.

Bell Canada's various unions are Canadian based, whereas the NHLPA was chartered as an International union. Two different animals. The NHLPA could also successful argue that travelling is an intrinsic part of carrying out regular business. Perhaps the Bell Canada union could not.

 

[mudcrutch79]

Bell Canada's various unions are Canadian based, whereas the NHLPA was chartered as an International union. Two different animals. The NHLPA could also successful argue that travelling is an intrinsic part of carrying out regular business. Perhaps the Bell Canada union could not.

Where are Bell's unions certified? If you show me one certified with a provincial board that includes employees outside the province, I might back off this position. Other than that, this decision seems pretty clear. The decision I'm referring to involved people who were legally Ontario residents who were stationed at bureaus outside the province.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Where are Bell's unions certified? If you show me one certified with a provincial board that includes employees outside the province, I might back off this position. Other than that, this decision seems pretty clear. The decision I'm referring to involved people who were legally Ontario residents who were stationed at bureaus outside the province.

Name me some Toronto Maple Leafs or Ottawa Senator players "stationed" as a condition of their employment outside the province of Ontario.

 

[mudcrutch79]

Name me some Toronto Maple Leafs or Ottawa Senator players "stationed" as a condition of their employment outside the province of Ontario.

Are you suggesting that the NHLPA actually doesn't exist, and we instead have 30 separate bargaining units?

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Are you suggesting that the NHLPA actually doesn't exist, and we instead have 30 separate bargaining units?

Yes. Of course I am. I would set them up just like the International Brotherhood of Bicycle Repairmen if I could, but alas, Ronald Reagan was thwarted my plans by stealing my bullhorn and tweed po'boy's cap.

Where did you get that? The NHLPA obviously encompasses multiple juristictions, but for the sake of an Ontario example, the Leaf and Sens players are covered by their provincial labour board.

 

[mudcrutch79]

Where did you get that? The NHLPA obviously encompasses multiple juristictions, but for the sake of an Ontario example, the Leaf and Sens players are covered by their provincial labour board.

I just cited a case for you where the OLRB refused to certify a union on the grounds that it had members outside the province. If the NHLPA is certified in Ontario, it's a bargaining unit made up solely of Sens and Leafs. I'd be stunned to find out that this is true, given that I've never heard mention of it anywhere. To make that perfectly clear, you're suggesting that there are separate units of Leafs and Sens, Oilers and Flames, Canucks and Canadiens, all with the power to negotiate their own agreement with the NHL.

If you have anything to back up what you're saying, put up. Otherwise? Shut up.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

LOL. Nice try.

 

[mudcrutch79]

Are you kidding me? You've been wrong on everything you've said throughout this entire thread. Most people with a sense of pride or dignity would have realized that they know nothing about this, and moved on with their lives at some point.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Are you kidding me? You've been wrong on everything you've said throughout this entire thread. Most people with a sense of pride or dignity would have realized that they know nothing about this, and moved on with their lives at some point.

If you think that the NHLPA has no legal status as a certified union in provincial juristictions you are sadly mistaken. The Yashin case was taken up before the Ontario Labour Relations Board. Unfair labour practices against Alan Eagleson and the NHL were heard in Alberta. There's two examples.

 

[GabbyDugan]

I can remember Rich Winter's 1991 petition to the A.L.R.B. to have the 1988 CBA declared void ....a precedent later cited in other cases...

http://www.sportslawnews.com/archive/Court Rulings/ForbesvEagleson.htm

The 1991 Alberta Labour Relations Board petition

In June 1991, agent Rich Winter--whose name is listed

along with Garvey's on the 1989 report--filed a petition

with the Alberta Labour Relations Board on behalf of two

NHL players seeking to void the 1988 CBA on the grounds

of collusion between Eagleson and the owners.

 

[mudcrutch79]

Well you're dead wrong, as usual, on the Yashin thing. The appeal to the Ontario court was rejected, and the judge noted "In order to have this matter determined, the NHLPA initiated the arbitration procedure and both the NHLPA and the NHL agreed on the issue to be submitted to the impartial arbitrator." at paragraph 6 of the decision. The arbitrator was apparently from Boston. Not too many OLRB members live in Boston.

 

[mudcrutch79]

I can remember Rich Winter's 1991 petition to the A.L.R.B. to have the 1988 CBA declared void ....a precedent later cited in other cases...

There's no decision of the board in the ALRD archives-that's not citing precedent in that link you provided, they're just referring to something. It looks like it never went anywhere. So that's wrong and wrong again BR. Flipping through the link you provided, they state that the petition was dropped as an agreement was reached between the parties.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Well you're dead wrong, as usual, on the Yashin thing. The appeal to the Ontario court was rejected, and the judge noted "In order to have this matter determined, the NHLPA initiated the arbitration procedure and both the NHLPA and the NHL agreed on the issue to be submitted to the impartial arbitrator." at paragraph 6 of the decision. The arbitrator was apparently from Boston. Not too many OLRB members live in Boston.

I'm not talking about the arbitration verdict. The case was filed in Ontario. The NHLPA was considered the plaintiff. Therefore, it was legally recognized.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

There's no decision of the board in the ALRD archives-that's not citing precedent in that link you provided, they're just referring to something. It looks like it never went anywhere. So that's wrong and wrong again BR. Flipping through the link you provided, they state that the petition was dropped as an agreement was reached between the parties.

Around, around, in circles we go.
:lol

 

[mudcrutch79]

I'm not talking about the arbitration verdict. The case was filed in Ontario. The NHLPA was considered the plaintiff. Therefore, it was legally recognized.

Literally, you're an idiot. You can google this stuff and check it out-you don't even need quicklaw. The NHLPA was a plaintiff in a private arbitration hearing. At the appeal in court, Yashin was on his own-the NHLPA didn't back him. Additionally, recognizing them in court wouldn't matter because that's not an OLRB hearing.

Aren't there any sort of tests that the mods have to pass to get their blue name tags?

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

It's been my general experience that the first person to lob insults indiscriminately is the loser in a debate.

 

[mudcrutch79]

It's been my general experience that the first person to lob insults indiscriminately is the loser in a debate.

Are you the guy who used to do Saddam's press briefings during Gulf War II?

It's been my experience that the person who gets point after point rejected by taking a look at the facts is the loser of the debate. I've rarely seen someone get their ass so thoroughly kicked in a public forum. It's so unnecessary too-Google for god's sake.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

It's been my experience that the person who gets point after point rejected by taking a look at the facts is the loser of the debate. I've rarely seen someone get their ass so thoroughly kicked in a public forum. It's so unnecessary too-Google for god's sake.

Au contrare mon frere. For I have emphatically displayed in this and other threads the legitimacy of the NHLPA in the face of futile attempts by Flat-Earthers like yourself to somehow deny or downplay their existence. Cup your hands over your ears and eyes all you want, but there is empirical evidence that the NHLPA is a formidable force not to be taken lightly. Gary Bettman does not take them lightly, nor does his phalanx of attorneys.

Your cadre of flummoxed law professors should stand back and watch.

 

[mudcrutch79]

Au contrare mon frere. For I have emphatically displayed in this and other threads the legitimacy of the NHLPA in the face of futile attempts by Flat-Earthers like yourself to somehow deny or downplay their existentence. Cup your hands over your ears and eyes all you want, but there is empirical evidence that the NHLPA is a formidable force not to be taken lightly. Gary Bettman does not take them lightly, nor does his phalanx of attorneys.

Your cadre of flummoxed law professors should stand back and watch.

Go read my position on this issue. I think it's pretty clear. And unlike you, I've actually put some thought into it-you're just spouting/reciting garbage.

But the subject of this debate, the certification of the union or lack thereof in Canada, you're a complete bust. A fraud. Why you won't admit that you were wrong is simply beyond me. Did you have any more "facts" you wanted to make up?

 

[The Imp]

Alfredsson weighs in: His take on the new proposal


Rookie max very significantly reduced (he really puts emphasis on that). Halt on mid- and top-range salaries.

Seems to think that a greater part of the NHLPA will not be happy with the proposal.


Expects a 40 game sched.