Jump to content

Class action lawsuit filed against CHL over wages


hf101

Recommended Posts

By: Robert Cribb Foreign
 
An unprecedented class action lawsuit striking at the economic foundations of junior hockey in Canada alleges the Canadian Hockey League and its teams “conspired” to force young players into signing contracts that breach minimum wage laws.
 
A statement of claim filed in a Toronto court Friday and obtained by the Star, seeks $180 million in outstanding wages, vacation, holiday and overtime pay and employer payroll contributions for thousands of young players given as little as $35 a week for practices, games, training and travelling that could add up to more than full-time hours.
 
The league and its teams “conspired and agreed together . . . to act in concert to demand or require that all players sign a contract which the defendants knew was unlawful,” the claim alleges. “Such conduct was high-handed, outrageous, reckless, wanton, deliberate, callous, disgraceful, wilful and in complete disregard for the rights of the (players).”
 
The allegations have not been proved in court.
 
David Branch, president of the CHL, said Sunday that he hadn’t yet seen a copy of the lawsuit but said the league “will vigorously defend the way our teams operate.”
 
“Our position is our players are amateur student athletes and we provide the best playing experience to our 1,300 players. . . It’s important that we defend this because it could have a huge impact on all amateur sport in this country.”
 
Payment is fixed depending on the age of players and the league in which they play. In the Ontario Hockey League (OHL), for example, players are paid between $50 and $120 a week for what could be up to 65 hours of work with no provisions for overtime, vacation or holiday pay, the statement of claim says.
 
The league’s teams are “unjustly enriched” with “hundreds of millions of dollars in revenues annually” based on the services provided by their young players, the claim alleges.
 

 

 
$50 - $120 per week is in addition to living expenses right?  This may be too little but they also aren't paying for their education correct?
 
65 hours a week?  I guess they are counting traveling time.  I don't think holiday and vacation pay is justified here, not many teenagers receive vacation when they work part time.  
 
 
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Generation of Entitlement" just keeps on rolling. I hear boy scouts want butlers now too.

 

Well, there is some merit to this. The CHL is making millions of dollars off the backs of these athletes. Without them, the CHL has no product to sell. It's very similar to the NCAA situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@brelic

 

Most of us pay to play hockey.

 

Sure, but you don't have a large crowd watching you, following your progress, do you? I mean other than your wives :)

 

It's inevitable that once a group starts making a lot of money at the expense of another group making a pittance, it's a recipe for change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@brelic

 

Our wives lost interest in watching us a long time ago.

 

These kids are getting help in following their dream. They get paid enough to have some spending money, get free room and board and an education. They also get some of the best people to aid in their development FOR FREE.

 

If I'm the CHL maybe I start charging what most of us pay to play in leagues all around the world. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@brelic

 

Our wives lost interest in watching us a long time ago.

 

These kids are getting help in following their dream. They get paid enough to have some spending money, get free room and board and an education. They also get some of the best people to aid in their development FOR FREE.

 

If I'm the CHL maybe I start charging what most of us pay to play in leagues all around the world. 

 

It's a good point, for sure. It's a great deal for those kids in many ways.

 

At what point, if any, does team revenue tip the imbalance into unfair territory? What do you think about the NCAA situation? Do you see it as similar to the CHL - they are getting free development, and should not be paid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@brelic

 

NCAA is different in that they are playing around a scholarship...junior is more like scholarship around playing if that makes any sense.

 

Before this goes any further...IF the CHL is forced to pay players more you're going to see many teams fold. That will hurt a lot of players. it will hurt a lot of fanbases in smaller markets who live for their junior teams. And as usual, it will line the lawyers pockets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We toyed with the idea of a junior team here. 

 

The costs were staggering.   

 

I don't think an addition to the expenses of any junior organization is a good idea.   

 

I know lots of kids who would be ecstatic for a chance to play in the Q or O for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't think an addition to the expenses of any junior organization is a good idea.



I know lots of kids who would be ecstatic for a chance to play in the Q or O for nothing.

 

 

I am with you Blocker. For me, so what if the major junior (or any amateur team) makes money. That does / should not give an entitlement to the player. The last time I checked, Juniors / CHL is a league intended for amateurs. Make sure the player is comfortable (good housing, good meals, etc.). Nothing more.

 

I know it may sound harsh, but hockey is an expensive sport to administer (from a team / arena perspective). Many teams are not profitable and for those that are, why should that profit go to the player at the amateur level?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make sure the player is comfortable (good housing, good meals, etc.). Nothing more.

 

Most junior players  formed a bond with the billeting parents.  Z Gigrgensen billeted with my son and they are very close.  My grandkids consider him as a brother.   That's pretty common.  And, it's something that should be fostered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that it took somebody this long to file a lawsuit. I don't know if the players deserve to win, but the CHL is talking out of its you-know-what when it comes to the scholarship they always go on about.

 

-Try to make the NHL for 1.5 years after you're out of the CHL? No scholarship.

-Play a year in the minors? One less year for your scholarship. Two years in the minors? Well, what's the difference, since you only had 18 months to apply anyway.

-Sign an ELC after being drafted? No scholarship.

 

Combining the fact that they just spent the least few years pumping up each kid full of NHL dreams ("just go work in the minors and you'll make it") but giving them a miniscule window in which to cash in the scholarship, CHL owners know they're not paying out for more than a very small amount of these.

 

Like I said, I don't know if that means the players should win their suit. I think they need to be honest in their assessment of their chances, but there's hardly an athlete alive who (at 20) thinks "Yup, I'm all done. I'd better head to school while the scholarship is still there." It would be good if they had that sort of insight, but young people aren't famous for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, the CHL's stipulations are BS in regards to the scholarship. I think the offer should be extended to a full 5 years, players should never be forced to pit their careers against a decent education. Really, this only affects about 5-7% of the players, the CHL would be better off public relations wise to fork over the extra years. It makes them look cheap and petty.


 


  Besides all that, I believe it's an honour to play in the CHL....and an HONOUR to be taught by the best coaches, play in front of great fans. The level of competition they play against is unique, and is not duplicated anywhere else.....how much would players pay for *that*? 


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

David Branch discusses expansion

 

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/26/ohl-has-no-desire-or-design-to-expand-david-branch

 

When the OHL’s board of governors approved the Plymouth Whalers sale, which kept the franchise in Michigan, a logical followup question popped up: will there ever be an all-American division?

Saginaw Spirit president Craig Goslin is fascinated by the notion of creating a division that mirrors the WHL’s U.S. Division. The Otters, although in the process of being sold, appear primed to stay in Erie after the book closes on the Connor McDavid era.

Factor in Flint, plus two more, and there’s your division. Not as easy as it sounds, of course, but there have been whispers about folks in both the Chicago area and New York state expressing interest in the OHL.

Branch acknowledged as much.

“We have a lot of discussions with different groups from time to time,” Branch said when asked about those specific markets. “I really don’t want to speculate or add to any of the speculation, but we’re very fortunate (to receive) the level of interest that there is.”

If a U.S.-only division were to come to fruition down the road, relocation – not expansion – would be the likelier scenario.

“Currently, we have no desire or design to expand,” he said. “We’re at 20 teams, have been for several years. We feel it’s important we not get too many teams so as to preserve the level and quality of play, which is important to the development of our players and obviously for our fans.

“Whether we’ll expand or relocate team to the U.S. is unknown right at the moment, but we certainly look forward to continuing to have a strong presence in the U.S. marketplace.”

In a more public manner, a Burlington, Ont., businessman named Tim Wilson has been gauging fan interest through a 12-question survey posted at OHL2Burlington.ca.

As of Monday, Wilson had garnered 710 season ticket requests, according to the campaign’s Twitter account. No suitable venue and Burlington’s close proximity to Mississauga, a team struggling at the box office, present huge hurdles.

“Certainly, we’re aware of some of the expressions of interest,” Branch said of the Burlington movement.

“We’ve had no discussion up to this point in time. Once again, our league has no immediate desire to consider expansion, and so forth. But, it’s always good to have some options and opportunities there, if we should choose to move in a different direction.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...