Question

[pld459666]

and this may be simple for some, but I'm a bit fuzzy on the matter.

Since it is the owners that are locking out the players, do the players still receive their salary and if not, Why not? and if they don't pay the salaries, can the players, not that they would, file suit for breech of contract thus making everyone in the NHL UFA's. UFA's because as of the 15th there would be no CBA and no guidelines to determine who can sign where.

Final Question:

Why couldn't the 15 some odd members of each team under contract file a class action suite against each employer to force them to pay their salaries as the players are not the ones causing this workstoppage?

Click to read more...

 

[Chili]

Won't some players be paid (i.e. injured players with contracts?)...also I was reading that some players will be able to play in the AHL. They have been changing the requirements to play in the AHL this season, not sure what the latest are.

Edit: Here is an article on some Ranger players who apparently will sign AHL contracts once a lockout is announced to be able to play there.

A tacit agreement between the NHL and NHLPA that will allow a small group of players to effectively circumvent pre-lockout waiver requirements means that Rangers such as Jed Ortmeyer, Jason LaBarbera, Blair Betts — and perhaps Jamie Lundmark — will open the season in Hartford under AHL contracts, The Post has learned.

Those aforementioned players ordinarily would have been required to clear waivers in order to play in the AHL during the lockout that will be announced by Gary Bettman following an NHL Board of Governors meeting tomorrow in Manhattan. But — with the knowledge and approval of both the league office and the union — Ortmeyer, LaBarbera and Betts are among players in similar situations around the league to have already agreed to AHL contracts under which they will receive their previously-agreed upon, two-way, minor-league salaries. Because the players are under NHL contracts, these AHL contracts cannot be signed or registered until after the lockout goes into effect on Thursday.

 

[hockeytown9321]

First off, no the players don't get paid. As for why, I don't know the legalities, but I assume its becuase the contracts were signed under a CBA that no longer exists, so those contracts are invalid.

players with 2 way contracts can play in the AHL.

 

[pld459666]

So...

First off, no the players don't get paid. As for why, I don't know the legalities, but I assume its becuase the contracts were signed under a CBA that no longer exists, so those contracts are invalid.

players with 2 way contracts can play in the AHL.

Anyone that had a contract prior to September 15th is a UFA on the 16th?

 

[Slats432]

and this may be simple for some, but I'm a bit fuzzy on the matter.

Since it is the owners that are locking out the players, do the players still receive their salary and if not, Why not? and if they don't pay the salaries, can the players, not that they would, file suit for breech of contract thus making everyone in the NHL UFA's. UFA's because as of the 15th there would be no CBA and no guidelines to determine who can sign where.

Final Question:

Why couldn't the 15 some odd members of each team under contract file a class action suite against each employer to force them to pay their salaries as the players are not the ones causing this workstoppage?

Since I am not a lawyer or know the CBA inside out, I can only take a stab.

The players do not receive their salaries UNLESS they are undergoing physical rehabilitation from a hockey injury (I read that Belfour would still get paid since he is in rehab for his back surgery.)

Otherwise they do not get paid. The reasoning is that the contract called the CBA supercedes contracts of individual players. They get paid based on the parameters of that agreement. All contracts are null and void until a new CBA is agreed to, or the league dissolves, OR Bettman exercises his rights under US Labour laws and declares a negotiating impasse and begins the league with new rules that are decided on unilaterally by the NHL.

 

[Slats432]

Anyone that had a contract prior to September 15th is a UFA on the 16th?

They can play in any other league rather than the NHL or AHL, which basically means...WHA, EURO leagues etc.

And what we are talking here is semantics. It is just as much the players not wanting to agree to a new offer that the owners are putting forth as the owners not agreeing to the status quo.

The only reason it is being called a lockout is that the players are willing to continue working under the previous agreement, and the owners are not. The owners are no more at fault in this than the players.(And some of us think less so.)