Owners may be liable for back pay

[Bicycle Repairman]

SJ Mercury News

Not only may the owners' nefarious plans for replacement players be thwarted by the NLRB, but they may be legislated to cough up back pay too.

The PA may lose nothing by sitting tight.

Click to read more...

 

[degroat*]

Very interesting to learn that in Quebec and maybe other Canadian provinces the NHLPA isn't a recognized union and in turn is not protected by labor laws.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Very interesting to learn that in Quebec and maybe other Canadian provinces the NHLPA isn't a recognized union and in turn is not protected by labor laws.

That is still open to legal challenge. If it can be shown that the NHLPA walks like a duck and talks like a duck, chances are it is a duck. Especially in a traditionally labour-friendly province.

What's interesting is why would a player cross a picket line if he stands a chance of recouping lost income.

 

[thinkwild]

Whats the basis for that claim? Bad faith bargaining?

 

[OpinionatedMike]

What would stop the NHL owners to get togeather, start up the SHL and continue operations under it with whatever salary cap they want?

Basicly start up a hockey league, tweak the rules a little and keep playing under a drifferent name.

If it was the same owners, then I'm pretty sure you could use the same team names and logos, as well as the arenas.

 

[thinkwild]

So their franchise values start at zero again, and anybody can bid for the new ones? They can start a new league if they want, but the same players are on strike, and if these guys dont want them, there are a lot of entrepreneurs that one will eventually get it right with the best players.

How is it going to look when they go to the courts and say we are disbanding our business in the middle of this labour dispute where we cant get our way, and are going to start up our teams again under a new name with different colours? I dont think the courts will likely fall for that childish attempt. They will more likely say stand up like men and negotiate or sell your franchises for $1.
.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

What would stop the NHL owners to get togeather, start up the SHL and continue operations under it with whatever salary cap they want?

Basicly start up a hockey league, tweak the rules a little and keep playing under a drifferent name.

If it was the same owners, then I'm pretty sure you could use the same team names and logos, as well as the arenas.

It would probably be a lot easier if it were the players who had declared a strike. HOwever, since the owners are the initiators of the works stoppage, im pretty sure the courts would not allow it. The amount of litigation required to eventually get it through labour laws, is probably quite prohibitive.

Secondly, they would require players. If the NHLPA members decide to not sign in this new league, who will play in it and who would pay to see it ?

DR

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

What would stop the NHL owners to get togeather, start up the SHL and continue operations under it with whatever salary cap they want?

Basicly start up a hockey league, tweak the rules a little and keep playing under a drifferent name.

If it was the same owners, then I'm pretty sure you could use the same team names and logos, as well as the arenas.

Oh good Lord. So the NHL should throw away a 87-year namesake? Anything else? Melt down the Stanley Cup so Gary Bettman can roll about a pair of silver balls like Captain Queeg in the Caine Mutiny?

You do know there's anti-trust laws, don't you?