NHL files unfair labor practice against NHLPA to NLRB
- Thread starter Taranis_24
- Start date
- Status
If the complaint doesn't have merit, the NHLPA has little to worry about. If it does have merit, and on the surface it appears that it does, the NHL was right to bring it at some point.
A real question is the timing. As we're not privy to the NHL strategy behind this, judgment as to right or wrong on the timing is pure speculation. The NHL may need this sort of lead time to get the matter settled legally before September.
It also could be a legal trojan horse: where it "inadvertently" tests the Labor Board & NHLPA positions on replacement players in the NHL as a key side show of the legal debate.
A real question is the timing. As we're not privy to the NHL strategy behind this, judgment as to right or wrong on the timing is pure speculation. The NHL may need this sort of lead time to get the matter settled legally before September.
It also could be a legal trojan horse: where it "inadvertently" tests the Labor Board & NHLPA positions on replacement players in the NHL as a key side show of the legal debate.
shveik said:
There was a lot of discussion in another thread that the NHL can have replacement players without declaring impasse. If this is the case, it makes since for the NHL to clear this up now. If they decide to go with replacement players in the future, this needs to be cleared up so players who are borderline on crossing are free to make that decision instead of worrying about how they will be able to repay $100K+ they recieved from the NHLPA.
The Messenger said:
It would be nice to see how the grievance is written. Don't know how it could be written to preventing the PA into forcing the players to return any money the players received the last 4 months or so. Maybe just trying to get a understanding what players may be available to them if they decide to go the replacement route, and in which format w/ or w/o NHLPA players.
Epsilon
#basta
bcrt2000 said:these unfair labor practice charges are MUCH less likely to go in favour of the NHL than if the NHL goes to impasse which means its really a gauge of where the NLRB stands in relation to the NHL.
it would mean the NLRB favours the NHL (if they favour the NHL in the unfair labor accusations).
i thought you guys would be able to spell it out yourself
No it doesn't. It means they rule in a certain way on one particular issue.
FLYLine27*
BUCH
Ok...looks like TSN updated there article since originally posted. And I agree what the NHL is doing..the NHLPA cant demand players who cross to repay them the money they got for this season. Thats a joke.
Mess
Global Moderator
I sort of agree .. It sounds more like a fishing expedition to see what the NHLPA does and how players react .. Maybe nothing more then a ploy to test Union solidarity ??Taranis_24 said:
The NHL has no say How much a player gets from his union or how its divided up anymore then NHLPA could file a complaint on how the NHL is using up its WAR CHEST.
maybe just a scare tactic to show the players that Repalcement players are an option .. but that act itself could be counter filed that the NHL is not negotiating but threatning replacements ..
Its very strange ?? I just don't see how until an actual player crosses a strike picket line and is asked to give the money back does this become and issue .. and then I still believe its a Player to his Union issue, not an NHL OWNER issue ..
well, this was one safety net the NHLPA wanted to keep up in order to keep the union together and prevent some sort of scab chain reaction, the NHLPA wants it gone so they can encourage players to cross the line.
Really the NHLPA didn't need to have this warchest as many players are earning money in Europe. Goodenow can claim that he wanted all the players to have some financial support during the lockout but wanted to ensure there wasn't anybody plotting a free ride. You know, take the year off, get a few 10,000 checks, then be a scab.
Really the NHLPA didn't need to have this warchest as many players are earning money in Europe. Goodenow can claim that he wanted all the players to have some financial support during the lockout but wanted to ensure there wasn't anybody plotting a free ride. You know, take the year off, get a few 10,000 checks, then be a scab.
It might work but it's clearly another blatant attempt by the NHL to break the union rather than come to a deal. What else could be better for the NHL in terms of breaking the union than a case against the PA where a lot of players will actually be rooting for the NHL to win, considering they want to keep the $?
On top of that, what players are really affected by paying back the 10k/month to the PA? The top paid players are not, and most of them won't be replacement players anyway. The players that would be affected by having to pay that money back are the low level players who need the money AND who would cross and become replacements. What better way to turn them against their own leadership than to have the NHL fight a case for them and make it easier for them to cross?
I don't have a problem if the PA makes them pay the money back and I don't think they will be charged with unfari practices...but it is a smart move by Bettman. It's clear the NHL wants to break the union before anything else, and going about it in this way is a lot safer than the rumor of them ending the lockout for players making less than 800k, or whatever it was.
On top of that, what players are really affected by paying back the 10k/month to the PA? The top paid players are not, and most of them won't be replacement players anyway. The players that would be affected by having to pay that money back are the low level players who need the money AND who would cross and become replacements. What better way to turn them against their own leadership than to have the NHL fight a case for them and make it easier for them to cross?
I don't have a problem if the PA makes them pay the money back and I don't think they will be charged with unfari practices...but it is a smart move by Bettman. It's clear the NHL wants to break the union before anything else, and going about it in this way is a lot safer than the rumor of them ending the lockout for players making less than 800k, or whatever it was.
bcrt2000 said:these unfair labor practice charges are MUCH less likely to go in favour of the NHL than if the NHL goes to impasse which means its really a gauge of where the NLRB stands in relation to the NHL.
it would mean the NLRB favours the NHL (if they favour the NHL in the unfair labor accusations).
i thought you guys would be able to spell it out yourself
Thats an abusrd argument. Its like saying Michael Jackson's lawyers want some evidence thrown out and if the judge agrees to it, that the judge is biased towards Jackson.
nyr7andcounting said:
notice when this came out, right after the players meetings concluded.
the draft cancellation and now this lawsuit, I think the NHL may be getting desperate and angry. bettman is really under the pressure to end this thing NOW.
Mess
Global Moderator
If the NHL is working with Union players going around the Union leadership to file a grievance ..That is probably a bigger UNFAIR Labour Practice Act then the idle threat at a Union meeting of returning a few thousand dollars in strike pay??
The timing of it coming out on Easter "Good Friday", perhaps the most important religious holiday can't get the NHL any favourable Fan support !!!
The timing of it coming out on Easter "Good Friday", perhaps the most important religious holiday can't get the NHL any favourable Fan support !!!
The Messenger said:
It most definitely would be an unfair labor practice. Circumventing the union is called direct dealing. There's an excellent chance the league has alreday engaged in it. If its found they did, impasse is thrown out.
ladybugblue
Registered User
The Messenger said:
Actually in the U.S. Good Friday is not a big holiday. Schools, work and even the mail gets delivered. And it is more than a few thousand for some of the players. The players should make their own decision without corision by either side.
well, how did Bettman find out that this was an NHLPA clause, that they must give back there $10,000 if they become replacements? Was it known all along and now the NHL decides to file suit?
how about the gag order and the million dollar find for breaking it? is that an unfair labor practice?
how about the gag order and the million dollar find for breaking it? is that an unfair labor practice?
hockeytown9321 said:
Not really. The way this will play out in the courts will be more of a political battle than a battle of principle. I think its more absurd to compare my argument to the MJ trial because one is criminal case where you are establishing if someone is guilty or not, while with the type of stuff involving the NLRB, you are trying to see if someone falls within the law or not... the facts are there for everyone to see
where were you when everyone was saying since republicans are in power, the NHL is more likely to get a decision their way?
The Messenger said:
Where does the article mention that they are working with players when they filed this complaint?
djhn579 said:
why would the article mention this, if it leaked out then Bettman would probably be bribing the newspaper as we speak to cover it up.
djhn579 said:
well, they obviously must have some players ready to step forward and testify for their case otherwise they have a baseless argument
that being said, if a player does not trust their union anymore, then i don't see why its unfair for them to turn to the league for help.
blamebettman said:
I doubt that the NHL is getting desperate. Angry? Probably. But then, they have probably been angry for a while...
This is just clearing the road so that they can move forward with replacement players when they decide to. It also sends a message to the union that if they don't come to the table with a real offer, they will get the NHL running without them.
If they were desparate, they would be relaxing their position. In my opinion, they are just sending the message that the PA needs to get serious...
djhn579 said:
It doesn't. It could have come from a an agent.
But it doesn't matter if it came from a player. Employees can relate unfair labor practices to management without management being guilty of an unfair labor practice themselves by listening to them and acting on them.
bcrt2000 said:
It's been mentioned in the press and is probably mentioned in Rob Ray's court case. That may be enough.
But, just the fact that players are talking to management is not in itself an unfair labor practice. Trying to make a deal with a player or group of players that are not the negotiating committe would be an unfair labor practice. That does not seem to be the case here.
and how do we know the individuals sending out this information to the NHL aren't some Goodenow plants? remember all those stories about the NHLPA on the verge of cracking? all BS.
The NHLPA was very vague and secretive this week, secret meetings, discussing future strategy, no media. You have to wonder what was up and if they were prepping for this.
The NHLPA was very vague and secretive this week, secret meetings, discussing future strategy, no media. You have to wonder what was up and if they were prepping for this.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Post-Game Talk: Panthers destroy Lightning to move on to the 2nd round!- Latest: WaitingForThatCab
-
