X-SHARKIE said:
First.
1. Well the NHL likely win this legal battle and if they declared Impasse would it work? Would wee see the NHL in 2005-2006?
Well thats the $2.1B question. No one knows. There has been a lot of speculation on this board both ways.
If the league declares an impasse, there will be an NHL season in 2005-06. What it will look like is uncertain. The sequence of events would be:
1. NHL declares an impasse. It's last offer is used as the basis for a temporary CBA. Note that this is a temporary CBA which allows them to resume operations, and that a new permanent one still needs to be negotiated with the NHLPA.
2. The NHL ends the lockout and invites players to training camp.
3. The NHLPA will have to decide to accept the impasse CBA (unlikely) and vote to strike.
4. NHL teams hire replacement players (and any current NHL players who decide to cross the picket lines) to fill out their teams. There are many issues here - immigration law, provincial labor codes on replacement workers, etc.
5. The season begins with replacemet players under the terms of the temporary CBA.
6. The NHLPA will challenge the Impasse before the NLRB. If the NLRB upholds that an impasse did indeed exist and that both sides negotiated in good faith, the league can continue to operate under the Impasse CBA (while still being obligated to negotiate with the PA on a permanent one). If the NLRB rules against the league, all hell breaks loose - the Impasse CBA is thrown out and the old (pre-lockout) CBA may be re-instated, the league could be sued for damages, and the league could choose to re-lockout the players rather than re-open with the old CBA. This is what happened to baseball in '94 - they declared impasse, it was not upheld, they had tp pay damages and operate under the old CBA.
7. If the NLRB upholds the Impasse, the union could give in and sign a new permanent CBA, keep the strike going indefinitely, or use the nuclear option - decertification. If the NHLPA decertifies itself, the Impasse CBA goes out the window, along with all the terms that are illegal without a CBA - Salary caps, the draft, RFAs, arbitration. The players would all become UFAs after their contracts expire, but they would no longer have the protections offered by the CBA - qualifying offers, minimum salaries, guaranteed contracts, etc. Each team would have to independently negotiate with each player and players could sue for damages if any team or teams act in a way that violates anti trust law.
2. If the NHL declares impasse are all previous contracts thrown out the window? Like would the Sharks loose the rights to Patrick Marleau...ect.
Thanks
No. Players under contract are still under contract, they would just be on strike. The terms of free agency - age, qualifying offers, RFAs, arbitration, etc - would all be spelled out in the Imapsse CBA. Patty would either still be under contract (depending upon the term of his current contract - it is aging as the lockout/strike continues and will eventually expire) or the Sharks will retain his rights under the RFA terms of the Impasse CBA or he will be a UFA (in the unlikely case the UFA age drops a lot in the Impasse CBA).
Now, if the NHLPA decertifies, all bets are off. Every player would be a UFA at the expiration of his contract.