A few myths need to be swatted away:
(1) The NHLPA is not a union.
BLONG7 said:
Right on, the PA is not a real union
Call it what you want, but all players must be in it, and it is the officially recognized bargaining agent for all players in all jurisdictions. That, my friends, is a union. Sure, they make more than the UAW, but they're still a union.
(2) Higher ticket prices are the result of higher salaries, which is the union's fault.
alecfromtherock said:
The NHLPA is the same union that has forced the Blue Collar workers to pay US$40.56 for the average NHL ticket in 2003-2004 because of skyrocketing player salaries.
This has been around for years, the idea that high salaries = high tickets. The two aren't related. Teams set ticket prices to maximize revenue, just like WalMart sets their prices to maximize revenue, or in their case, profits. Because people are willing to pay $40.56 for a ticket, that's the price. That, in turn, lets owners pay the players more. Chop salaries by 50% and you won't see prices fall by 50%.
(3) Union members in general won't support the NHLPA or reject the idea of a scab league because the NHLPA is made up of rich people.
Also false. In BC and Quebec, for example, laws exist forbidding the use of replacement workers. If, by some miracle, the NHL somehow circumvents these laws and uses scabs in Vancouver and Montreal, there will be instant outrage. Not because union workers care that millionaire hockey players are missing out, but because if the non-scab law doesn't apply to hockey, what's to say it applies to trade unions? If the NHL doesn't have to abide by it because they're rich, then why would the richer GM pay attention to anti-scab laws? There would be a legal precedent set allowing scabs, and that is not what any union worker wants to see.
A scab would be the most hated creature in BC or Quebec, for those reasons. Doesn't matter if they are replacing millionaires or low-paid factory workers.