Irishjim Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 OrangeAndBlackPack.comThroughout the Thanksgiving break, you may have heard about the Players' Union threatening "decertification", which ultimately means liquidating the NHLPA as we know it. It's incredibly difficult to understand decertification, at least to a layman like myself who has very little knowledge of sports law. Pro Hockey Talk broke down an explanation given by Gabe Feldman, director of Tulane Law School's sports law program, and separated the highlights into five bullet points --1. By dissolving the union, the players can file an anti-trust lawsuit and argue that the lockout is now an illegal group boycott.2. On the flip side, the players would no longer be protected by labor laws, so in that regard they will have exposed themselves “to the mercy of NHL owners.” For example, without the NHLPA, things like health benefits, the minimum salary, and even guaranteed contracts could be impacted.3. If the players decertify and then lose the subsequent legal battle, then they will have “lost all leverage.”4. The NHL will likely attempt to counter the union decertifying by claiming that it’s “just a sham and should not be recognized.”5. Finally, with regards to the chances of the players being successful if they decertify and take the NHL to court, Feldman said: “If somebody’s telling you they know, they are either delusional or lying to you.”Bill Daly has since then said that if the NHLPA goes down this path, then the 2012-13 season is lost beyond a doubt.I am still trying my best to understand the strategy of this move, so I'm opening the floor in the comments below to anyone who can clear this up better than I can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerrod Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 If they do go down this path, De-certification, the legal costs for the owners will blow that 1.5 mil per team per year straight out of the water. I think whether the players win or lose with that gambit it is going to cost owners a small fortune because it becomes individual challenges from each player against each owner. That is probably the biggest threat they have to date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGreatGazoo Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Would the players ALL become free agents at that point, too(decertify)? I read that somewhere this morning...trying to find it. If that's the case, that's a pretty big pill for players to swallow. Especially ones with long term, big $$$ contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idahophilly Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Would the players ALL become free agents at that point, too(decertify)? I read that somewhere this morning...trying to find it. If that's the case, that's a pretty big pill for players to swallow. Especially ones with long term, big $$$ contracts.I read that also DGG. They all lose their contracts and everyone is a free agent, whether they win in court or not. There is only a 50% chance (a coin toss) if they win. If they don't my understanding is the owners can write the CBA in anyway they want and the players can play for the NHL or not. Those that do go into a massive draft. Going to court would indeed be expensive for the teams but equally crippling for the players, who would not have the benefit of the PA and their army of lawyers. The term nuclear option is rather appropriate. I suppose if the PA wants to kill the business they work for they should definatly do it. It's the closest they will get to being able to. Even if they do the wealthy owners will form a new league later and still draft their own CBA in anyway they want. If the PA wins it will have completly destroyed the ability of most teams to function and the NHL would likely collapse anyway leaving them with out jobs. Even the Flyers would be in trouble. Either way, the PA loses. The wealthy owners will be fine. They may lose the NHL and their teams but they will be fine on a personal level. The players will have spent a huge portion of their money to fight in court, lost 2-3 years of their careers and if they work in N.America ever again it will be under harsher conditions... I say go for it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idahophilly Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 If they do go down this path, De-certification, the legal costs for the owners will blow that 1.5 mil per team per year straight out of the water. I think whether the players win or lose with that gambit it is going to cost owners a small fortune because it becomes individual challenges from each player against each owner. That is probably the biggest threat they have to date.Much like my Twinkie fetish, you have this obsession on that 1.5 million figure which is not the case (really! I mean it literally has no basis in the reality of business accounting and law because if it did they could go get the 18 yr old kid from wallmart to do their books for them). I wish I could see economics/business that simple. Hell, we wouldn't need a single business school or corporate law attorney anywhere from sea to shining sea... I'll give ya one thing, you sure do stick by your point no matter what... You go man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyerrod Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Much like my Twinkie fetish, you have this obsession on that 1.5 million figure which is not the case (really! I mean it literally has no basis in the reality of business accounting and law because if it did they could go get the 18 yr old kid from wallmart to do their books for them). I wish I could see economics/business that simple. Hell, we wouldn't need a single business school or corporate law attorney anywhere from sea to shining sea... I'll give ya one thing, you sure do stick by your point no matter what... You go man!You don't get it...I understand.1)The numbers are in the post Irishjim made of the NHLPA proposal. REAL, factual numbers.2) The article from the latimes breaks down how management got concessions from the union on jobs, pay,medical, and retirement since they first filed for bankruptcy in 2006 but did nothing but saddle the company with more debt after giving themselves pay raises and bonuses.So yes, I will stick to the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 As i read rod, he's taaking the "$180 million" that the two sides are "apart" and breaking it down to cost per team over a set period of time.His argument is that if every team would agree to, as the Flyers have done the past two seasons, waste $1.XM on a Jody Shelley type player this whole thing could be avoided.It's an interesting theory that, like much we "know" about the CBA, is more likely conjecture than anything else, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.