Ring 6
PatsFans.com Supporter
PatsFans.com Supporter
2021 Weekly Picks Winner
2022 Weekly Picks Winner
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2004
- Messages
- 63,761
- Reaction score
- 14,113
Remember this wasn't even a case it was a preliminary injunction.Just read a snyonpsis of the Judge's ruling and basically she says the the labor laws do not appy in this case, because their is no union and management, the union is disssovled and basically the owners can do what they want. The only problem for the owners is that they have an anti-trust lawsuit against them, so if they do nothing and don't sign any free agents, they are basically making the case that they are a monopoly, my bet is that they go back to last years rules and maybe stick the players with a few new twists.
The Final paragraph of her ruling....
“The nation’s labor laws have always applied only where an action involves or grows out of a labor dispute. Such a labor relationship exists only where a union exists to bargain on behalf of its members. Where those employees effectively renounce the union as their collective bargaining agent — and accept the consequences of doing so — and elect to proceed in negotiating contracts individually, any disputes between the employees and their employers are no longer governed by federal labor law. Likewise, the Norris-LaGuardia Act, which applies only to preclude some injunctions in the context of ‘labor disputes,’ also no longer applies here to preclude injunctive relief. The NFL urges this Court to expand the law beyond these traditional dictates and argues that the protections of labor law should apply for some indefinite period beyond the collapse and termination of the collective bargaining relationship. In the absence of either persuasive policy or authority, this Court takes a more conservative approach, and declines to do so.
“This Court, having found that the Union’s unequivocal disclaimer is valid and effective, concludes there is no need to defer any issue to the NLRB. Because that disclaimer is valid and effective, the Norris-LaGuardia Act’s prohibition against injunctive relief does not preclude granting the Player’s motion for a preliminary
injunction against what the League characterizes as a ‘lockout.’
“Based on the foregoing, and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that:
“1. The Brady Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction [Doc. No. 2] is
GRANTED;
“2. The Eller Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction [Doc. No. 58] is
MOOT; and
“3. The ‘lockout’ is enjoined.”
@legal note, all court proceedings are "public domain" so no copyright laws apply!
In the immortal words of braodcasting legend "Mean" Gene, we could have pandamonimum breaking out in the ring!!! The players have no union, they at "at will" employees governed by only thier signed employement contracts. The league could make up any rules they want. I say lets break out the XFL rules, no fair catches, mortal combat verus a coin flip to start the game, I'm lovin it!
BTW, as of this moment, Peyton Manning is a free agent!
The judge essentially ruled that the players would be harmed more by being locked out while the court case is being fought that the owners would by not being able to lock them out.
This is very, very far from a resolution, and could actually be a step backward as far as those who just want football and don't care which side 'wins'.