This Lockout is going to last forever: NHL fired HALF its Employees Today!

[no13matssundin]

CBC is reporting that the NHL laidoff 300 + people working @ the NHL offices in Toronto, Montreal & New York, more than half its entire workforce.

Judging from THAT, this Lockout is going to last for a good looonnnnnnng time... 2 years is my prediction.

Click to read more...

 

[John Flyers Fan]

CBC is reporting that the NHL laidoff 300 + people working @ the NHL offices in Toronto, Montreal & New York, more than half its entire workforce.

Judging from THAT, this Lockout is going to last for a good looonnnnnnng time... 2 years is my prediction.

Just a complete joke ... glad to see they're spending some of that $320 million war chest .... to keep the "little people" happy and working.

 

[Kravitch]

This is literally the Judgment Day of hockey!

 

[jeffbear]

This isn't news guys. They annouced a planned layoff way the heck back in July.

 

[Schenn02]

Oh man this is gonna be a long lockout

 

[Juneemoon]

From last week's The Hockey News:

The NHL wouldn't comment on a report that commissioner Gary Bettman, senior executives and department heads spared by the league's staff purge wouldn't be taking pay cuts if there's no hockey. But a source close to the situation says employees who stand to be laid off come Sept. 20 are bitter at the way things have played out. In particular, they're steamed that Bettman, who reportedly earns $3 million a year thanks to a 2003 raise, will continue to collect every cent of his paycheck. Some employees are also critical those given pink slips weren't extended the option of working reduced hours for reduced pay. By contrast, Bob Goodenow and his executive team of Ted Saskin, Ian Pulver and Ian Penny will not be collecting their salaries if there's a lockout and they've promised to keep all their employees on. It remains unclear, however, whether the compensation they forfeit during a lockout would be made up in full once a new CBA is signed.

 

[Kravitch]

Shhhh....the Press Conference is starting.

 

[ACC1224]

were they laid-off or fired??? big difference

 

[SensGod]

were they laid-off or fired??? big difference

laid off...they are getting compensation packages.

 

[ACC1224]

laid off...they are getting compensation packages.

so the could be called back anytime.....non issue.

 

[Puckhead]

were they laid-off or fired??? big difference

Fired means fired, laidoff means don't come back until we call you. Either way, those people are not getting paid...How is that a big difference? If this lockout goes 6 months or 1year or 2 years, it makes little difference to those people, because they have no way of knowing how long it will take, so they no doubt will need to look for jobs.

 

[ACC1224]

Fired means fired, laidoff means don't come back until we call you. Either way, those people are not getting paid...How is that a big difference? If this lockout goes 6 months or 1year or 2 years, it makes little difference to those people, because they have no way of knowing how long it will take, so they no doubt will need to look for jobs.

fired means don't come back at all....laid off could mean come back next week

 

[Terrier]

From last week's The Hockey News:

The NHL wouldn't comment on a report that commissioner Gary Bettman, senior executives and department heads spared by the league's staff purge wouldn't be taking pay cuts if there's no hockey. But a source close to the situation says employees who stand to be laid off come Sept. 20 are bitter at the way things have played out. In particular, they're steamed that Bettman, who reportedly earns $3 million a year thanks to a 2003 raise, will continue to collect every cent of his paycheck. Some employees are also critical those given pink slips weren't extended the option of working reduced hours for reduced pay. By contrast, Bob Goodenow and his executive team of Ted Saskin, Ian Pulver and Ian Penny will not be collecting their salaries if there's a lockout and they've promised to keep all their employees on. It remains unclear, however, whether the compensation they forfeit during a lockout would be made up in full once a new CBA is signed.

Bettman got a RAISE??!! Why, because he brought the NHL to Nashville?

 

[Hire Sather]

I dont think it will last 2 years.

A year at the most, hopefully we can get a half season this year.

 

[I am Jack's Fish]

NHL employees were given the option two months ago of taking a "buy-out" settlement that took effect immediately that forbid them from being ineligeble for thier jobs when the lock out ended, or they could stay on until today, get laid off and remain eligible for their old positions when the lock-out ended.

 

[Puckhead]

fired means don't come back at all....laid off could mean come back next week

Lets put things in perspective...You just got laid off by the NHL, you have no idea how long it will last, but all the experts are talking about 6 months to 2 years. You have, a mortgage, you have bills, and car payments, and a general lifestyle you have grown accustomed to. What are you supposed to do? They did receive some compensation, but that could seem like small potatoes if this thing lasts. The obvious deadline day would be sometime in late December or very early into January. If by then there is still no deal, then this season is scrapped and it lasts until next September atleast. Don Cherry was on a local all sports station this morning and he mentioned that if there is no hockey in January 2005, there won't be any hockey until January 2006. He also said that if the latter happens that no less than 5 NHL teams will fold. Whatever the compensation package was, it won't matter, if the worst case scenario takes place. So you can act non-chalant about this lockout and say that they could be back next week, but I think you know there is no chance of that.

 

[RLC]

So both sides have painted themselves into this corner.

Fact- neither side must come out of this looking like a cave in to the opposition.
Fact- both sides will want to look like they faught the good fight.
Fact- anything past Xmass will do permentant damage to both sides.

conclusion - look for xmass to be deal time. Look for in return for no cap the players will agree to alternative ways to in fact hold down the owners costs ( luxtax,rookiecap,arbitration changes which I see as a the key issue. No owner cares if Jagr makes 10 million if indeed he scored 50-60 goals that year he would have brought in a ton of money for the club along the way but what of the same 10million if he has a bad year and score 25 or as we have seen in the past does not work as hard since he is now a mulitmillionair. An arbitration must be allowed to claw back some of that huge salary. After all in a bad year that same Jagr would not have drawn in big money for the club. so the effect of pay-for-preformance would be the arbitration process. But with no cap after scoring 50-60 goals he will be able to cashin for that 10mill contract.

 

[I in the Eye]

My prediction is that it won't be Christmas/Jan...

IMO, the NHLPA is waiting for Christmas/Jan... IMO, the NHLPA is expecting the NHL to back down to save a part of the season - like the NHL has done before...

I don't think the NHL will this time... I think that there will be no hockey this year...

 

[Licentia]

So both sides have painted themselves into this corner.

Fact- neither side must come out of this looking like a cave in to the opposition.
Fact- both sides will want to look like they faught the good fight.
Fact- anything past Xmass will do permentant damage to both sides.

conclusion - look for xmass to be deal time. Look for in return for no cap the players will agree to alternative ways to in fact hold down the owners costs ( luxtax,rookiecap,arbitration changes which I see as a the key issue. No owner cares if Jagr makes 10 million if indeed he scored 50-60 goals that year he would have brought in a ton of money for the club along the way but what of the same 10million if he has a bad year and score 25 or as we have seen in the past does not work as hard since he is now a mulitmillionair. An arbitration must be allowed to claw back some of that huge salary. After all in a bad year that same Jagr would not have drawn in big money for the club. so the effect of pay-for-preformance would be the arbitration process. But with no cap after scoring 50-60 goals he will be able to cashin for that 10mill contract.

I don't think so man. The league is really serious this time. I don't pay attention to other sports labor issues, but it seems to me now, that no owners in any sport have ever been as serious as the NHL is now. I could be wrong about that, but i'm not wrong that the NHL is extremely serious.

Please WHA come to life!!! I want hockey!

 

[Licentia]

My prediction is that it won't be Christmas/Jan...

IMO, the NHLPA is waiting for Christmas/Jan... IMO, the NHLPA is expecting the NHL to back down to save a part of the season - like the NHL has done before...

I don't think the NHL will this time... I think that there will be no hockey this year...

The owners are serious. Extremely serious. I don't see this ending until the owners get exactly what they want. In the article I read today, Bettman said that owners are threatening to leave if the system isn't changed. Also, the league won't be able to expand further with the current system, because no owner wants to bleed green for salaries on top of the franchise cost.

 

[hockeytown9321]

The owners are serious. Extremely serious. I don't see this ending until the owners get exactly what they want. In the article I read today, Bettman said that owners are threatening to leave if the system isn't changed. Also, the league won't be able to expand further with the current system, because no owner wants to bleed green for salaries on top of the franchise cost.

Some owners might leave, but vancouver just got sold and Anaheim is close to being sold. first, if things were as bad a the owners say, wopuld any businessman in thier right mind buy a team right now, and second, there will always be millionaires and billionaires willing to lose money to play.

 

[adurn]

Wait, wait, wait, hold the phone.

Bettman makes $3 million? Of all the incompetent buttnuts in the world, he gets paid $3 million a year to ruin a once thriving league? This angers me to no end. What in his past (non)accomplishments warrants $3 million, much less a RAISE?

How anybody thought a former NBA executive could effectively run ANY hockey league, much less the biggest in the world, is beyond me.

 

[RLC]

I don't think so man. The league is really serious this time. I don't pay attention to other sports labor issues, but it seems to me now, that no owners in any sport have ever been as serious as the NHL is now. I could be wrong about that, but i'm not wrong that the NHL is extremely serious.

Please WHA come to life!!! I want hockey!

All I am saying is , that in the end the clubs will get a sort-of cap. Not actual being called a cap but a mechanism that would have the same effect. A way to hold down costs. A way to claw back super high contracts if the player stops performing at the level that got him that huge contract. And also a way to curtail the big spenders from overspending therefore some kind of a luxury tax. I think those two elements might do the trick over the next 5 years to rebalance the books. But the concession by the NHLPA must meet the leagues red ink, if enough concession are given at the players insistance of no actual salary cap then that should be the deal. If the players wont conceed enough to rebalance the books then it's all on the players and it would be they that cause problem.
When I heard a player say "maby the best things is to contract the league or move the franchises arround " I took that to mean maby the league should look for more rich guys to dump their money into failing clubs as long as I get my high contract then too bad on those rich guys.

 

[Snap Wilson]

so the could be called back anytime.....non issue.

Yeah, tell that to your landlord when it's time to cough up the rent.

"I'll pay you when the layoff is over. Non issue."

 

[djhn579]

Some owners might leave, but vancouver just got sold and Anaheim is close to being sold. first, if things were as bad a the owners say, wopuld any businessman in thier right mind buy a team right now, and second, there will always be millionaires and billionaires willing to lose money to play.

Vancouver is very profitable right now, so it would make sense to buy them. If the buyer is convinced that the lockout will make the team even more profitable, why not take the chance?

Anaheim is being sold for about $50M if the news is correct. Buy when the price is low. There is some risk with the lockout, but again if the buyer is convinced that the lockout will result in a system that will make a team more profitable, why not?

Then again, maybe these perspective new owners are just looking for a new toy...