NHLPA Proposal (PDF)

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by NewGuy, Dec 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. NewGuy

    NewGuy Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,702
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  2. the fact that they have this proposal posted on their website shows that this is nothing more than a ploy to sway public opinion.
     
  3. Lexicon Devil

    Lexicon Devil Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2002
    Messages:
    8,343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That makes zero sense.

    Obviously they're going to play the PR game. That doesn't imply that the offer is illegitimate.
     
  4. It means that if they were bargaining in good faith, they wouldn't be posting their proposal on the WWW for every Joe Hockey to read before the league has dealt with it. In fact, even after the league has addressed the proposal, it isn't in good faith to post it.
     
  5. YellHockey*

    YellHockey* Guest


    They have every right to post it considering Bettman's method of negotiaton. If they post it in its entirity, Bettman can't come back with distortions and half-truths about what is in it in any attempt to sway public opinion to the owners' side.

    They put it out there, let the fans see that the players are offering up a lot and have the fans put pressure on the owners to save the season.

    Once the fans turn against the owners, this lockout should end pretty quick.
     
  6. Drake1588

    Drake1588 UNATCO

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Messages:
    28,515
    Likes Received:
    287
    Trophy Points:
    199
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    There is some irony in accusing the union of starting to play a PR game, considering the extent to which the league has tried to wield PR as a cudgel for months now...
     
  7. What has Bettman done that is bargaining in bad faith? He has gagged the owners, which is a good thing. Nobody should be speaking out of turn. The players are shooting from the lip like drunken cowboys at the saloon. The NHLPA is the one that has continually been bargaining in bad faith and in ways that are prolonging settlement.
     
  8. YellHockey*

    YellHockey* Guest

    He claimed that he never discussed negotiating whether or not contracts are guaranteed which was technically true but he had also set a memo to the PA indicating that it would a topic of conversation.

    He also whined for quite some time about how the PA wouldn't meet with the owners and scolded them for it, then months later it was revealed that they had been meeting all along but that the sides had signed a non-disclosure agreement that they wouldn't reveal that they had been meeting.
     
  9. ChemiseBleuHonnete

    ChemiseBleuHonnete Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Messages:
    9,674
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My thoughts exactly.
     
  10. Scorpion88

    Scorpion88 Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    183
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Devon
    Good thing they included Arturs Irbe in this critical meeting. His input would have been absolutely crutial in making these decisions!!
     
  11. SwisshockeyAcademy

    SwisshockeyAcademy Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    3,094
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    The rejection of this current offer will not turn fans against the owners. It is alot of fluff led by a 24% reduction they can take and throw in the garbage right now. A 24% rollback would be fairly signifigant at my company here in the real world. In the NHL it does nothing to solve the problem at hand.
     
  12. me2

    me2 Calling out the crap

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    33,602
    Likes Received:
    1,526
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Location:
    Blasting the bull***
    I can't see anything worng with posting it. Its their offer and they want it publically known. That's their choice. I think the people are getting paranoid if they are bagging the NHLPA over this.
     
  13. They might have to cancel the money fight!!! ;)

    Seriously what is 24% to the majority who are grossly overpaid?
     
  14. It is not a proper bargaining tactic to make public a proposal at anytime, let alone before the other side has a chance to deal with it. You only make public once it has been accepted. I think they believe it will be rejected and are counting on some angry fans thinking this was a good offer.
     
  15. SwisshockeyAcademy

    SwisshockeyAcademy Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    3,094
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    I do not have a problem with them posting it because PR is part of the business. They may fool some but they will not fool many.It is far from what it will take to end this lockout.
     
  16. MS

    MS 1%er

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    26,231
    Likes Received:
    7,244
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    When the NHL made several proposals to the union a few months ago, an outline of the proposals was up on NHL.com almost immediately. How is this any different?

    And of course the NHL has a propaganda website set up, which contains article after article ripping the NHLPA:

    www.nhlcbanews.com
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2004
  17. YellHockey*

    YellHockey* Guest

    Says you.

    To the average hockey fan, they'll hear that the players are prepared to give back a quarter of their salary and that's about it. The players are willing to cut a quarter of their salary and the owners won't accept it?

    The public have accepted fluffier things from the owners in the past.
     
  18. SwisshockeyAcademy

    SwisshockeyAcademy Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    3,094
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    So what you are saying is that this was a proposal aimed at the average hockey fan as the NHLPA try to end the lockout by turning fans against the owners without trying to solve the problems at hand. They may win a few fans with the proposal but it will not be the average fan that signs on the dotted line. The owners are going get a deal that works for them and this was not the one.
    You know full well that a 24% cut in the current setup can be made back incredibly quickly. Yes the guys on current contracts do have to lay on the grenade to a degree but it will keep the current system intact and that is not a system that the owners will agree to.
     
  19. Drake1588

    Drake1588 UNATCO

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Messages:
    28,515
    Likes Received:
    287
    Trophy Points:
    199
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Without question, the owners will sit up and take notice at the sheer amount of money involved in this proposal. For that reason it is the basis for the first real negotiations to begin, since the two sides are effectively now in the same dollar range. While neither the NHL nor the NHLPA expected the first proposal to be acceptable to everyone, this is a significant start to a process in which the players will expect and be expected to give up still more concessions.
     
  20. Kid Canada

    Kid Canada Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    The NHLPA has one too.

    www.nhlpa.com
     
  21. thinkwild

    thinkwild Veni Vidi Toga

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    8,967
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Location:
    Ottawa
    THe owners state they are losing $270mil, so the players take a pay cut over $270mil and offer ways to keep thenm lower. How can a businessman make the case that this isnt enough. He needs it guaranteed? How can people buy that fluff?
     
  22. me2

    me2 Calling out the crap

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    33,602
    Likes Received:
    1,526
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Location:
    Blasting the bull***
    $270m before additional business costs like interest on loans, depreciation etc IIRC. I think it comes out closer to $400m (depending on figure fudging).

    But its a good start by the NHLPA. Tack on a nasty luxury tax and its close.
     
  23. vanlady

    vanlady Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2004
    Messages:
    810
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Do you have any idea what bargaining in bad faith is? What has the NHL done to bargain in bad faith, let me see, the NLRB would view all of the following bargaining in bad faith.

    1. They have not tabled a formal proposal since negotiations started, 6 one paragraph concepts are not proposals

    2. Like it or not the union has made 2 proposals, neither the league has offered a counter proposal

    3. Take it or leave it bargaining is a huge no no. Negotiation is just that. The NLRB demands that both sides come to the table with the clear intent on give and take to get an agreement

    4. Proposing items that are mandatory subjects of bargaining that are designed to frustrate the process of bargaining is a no no. They like to refer to this as surface bargaining.

    5. It is highly illegal not to provide the books when you start screaming financial circumstance. This does not mean the Levitt report, the PA is entitled under law to the real books. Oh and if the owners want to go to impasse they're goona have to cough up with the real books to the NLRB

    6. The league has already been taken to the board over there lack of providing a list of locked out players

    Add it all up you get bad faith. The players are playing by all the labor laws.
     
  24. Kid Canada

    Kid Canada Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Those are proposals. There's nothing that says anything about length. They are proposals. So the NLRB would have no case; as you suggest otherwise.
     
  25. vanlady

    vanlady Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2004
    Messages:
    810
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Sorry but proposals must contain more than one subject of bargaining. To negotiatiate on only one subject of bargaining and refusing to bargain on any other mandatory subject of bargaing is a no no. Mandatory subjects of bargaining include wages, conditions of work, arbitration and free agency.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"