PFT: Ten things to know right now about the labor situation

[lurker1965]

Call me slow, but I've just realized that a stoppage is bad for the media too. If it's short, I imagine the individuals in the media will get paid and their employers will suffer, but a long one could be a big problem for them too.

The same surely goes for a bunch of team employees.

If the league and the players dribble away a bunch of money, they won't be the only ones who lose out.

A whole bunch of "industries" will suffer if games are missed.

OK, "industries" is not the right word, but you know what I'm saying. Pizza, beer, local bookies, etc. Not to mention the gas station two miles from the stadium. The local church group that has theses strange men attending for the first time drinking the complimentary punch, etc.

All the freshly unemployed will join the millions of unslaughtered for their wings chickens that over run every NFL city. Chickens that curse their years of breeding making them unfit for anything but being eaten.

With shame of the unemployed and pain of the chickens so freely mixed their will only be one way to stop it. Stop it, temporarily anyway.

The only thing that could momentarily abate that pain/shame mix is the eating of brains.

The players and owners could cause a zombie apocalypse.

OK, past my bedtime.

 

[Rob0729]

Here is information on NFL's antitrust exemption for labor:

To prevent unions from antitrust liability, a "labor exemption" was created under the Clayton Act of 1914. It has two components. The so-called "statutory" labor exemption allows unions to enter into agreements which may create a monopolistic practice regarding the working conditions of the employees it represents.

The "Non-Statutory Labor Exemption" -- the more applicable concept in sports law -- is a judicially-derived expansion of the labor exemption that protects union activity from antitrust scrutiny. It has been the crux of nearly all antitrust actions in professional sports (with the exception of baseball, which had an blanket exemption from antitrust laws until late in 1998).

The non-statutory labor exemption is based on the policy that favors collective bargaining and gives it preference over the antitrust laws. Basically, any union-management agreement that was a product of good faith negotiation will receive protection from the antitrust laws. That means that the provisions of the agreement cannot be attacked as collusive or anti-competitive. Say that a salary cap is agreed to by a union and management. In pure antitrust terms, a cap can be a violation of the antitrust law. But since the cap was part of the collective bargaining agreement negotiatedin good faith and agreed-to by the union and management, the cap cannot attacked in court as a violation of antitrust.

Read more: Answers.com - What is an antitrust exemption


So Florio is right that everything under the CBA is covered by the non-statutory labor antitrust exemption and at least theoretically, if the the player's lawsuit is pushed far enough the NFL could be stripped of this exemption which would end the CBA all together and all that comes with it including the draft, salary cap, and free agency.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The players couldn't afford to keep extending the CBA indefinitely -- the longer they wait, the less chance there is that they'll be able to win an injunction against the lock-out before next season starts, considering the NFL's inevitable appeal of any unfavorable decision. The longer negotiations went on, the less leverage they had -- which is, of course, why the league was dragging its feet during the negotiations, until literally hours before the deadline to decertify.

What's more, their decertification doesn't prevent continuing negotiations. The NFL made a show about being ready to keep talks going, but is refusing to conduct them with the players' counsel in the law suit. So they're insisting on talking only with the NFLPA, but aren't willing to waive their right to argue that the NFLPA's participations in said negotiations proves that the decertification was a sham.

Another thing to remember is that the lockout is entirely voluntary on the owners' part. If the owners dropped the lockout, the players could drop the suit, and both parties could continue negotiations, with the league operating under the conditions of the last year of the previous CBA until a new one is reached.

And if pigs had wings they could fly. And we could all break into a chorus of kumbayah... Only the SSA stipulated that unless the union waited UNTIL the CBA expired they could indeed claim decertification was a sham. The trade off the union couldn't sell to players was if they did that the lawsuit had to wait 6 months when it would likely be too late to provide leverage...

I believe it could not happen as you envision because that agreement has now expired and the union is no longer, you know, a union <except we all know it is>... Talking with the lawyers has been the root of the problem to date, why would you want to take that to the next level and talk only to the class counsel?? That's tantamount to settlement negotiations and would likely inject some judge like Doty or Nelson back into the mix for the forseeable future. And why should the league waive it's right to make a claim central to it's defense?? The lockout was as voluntary as the decertification. In fact even less so, since absent it the owners would presently be clearly in violation of anti trust operating as they historically have absent a collectively bargained agreement.

I just speed read the players counsel's brief in response to the league's brief. One thing I keep noting is that the NFLPA refuses to acknowledge that they jumped the gun in decertifying prior to the expiration of the CBA in which the language is pretty clear... Close only counts in horseshoes.

And as to their argument about the irreperable damage being caused because players cannot train with their teams this spring, the League should present 2010 pro bowler Logan Mankins as exhibit one that the lightly attended off season workout programs coaches normally struggle to get these clowns to participate in can make little difference in your level of performance once you return to the fold provided you stay in shape at your own expense. And they should present some actual historical data on the % of FA signings that occur prior to the draft each season. And they could get another of the 5th or 6th year FA hostages NFLPA handed them last year to speak to how devastating it was to lose the opportunity to be a FA at all for a whole year even when it was your own union who swapped you for an uncapped year when it suited their purposes.

The NFLPA class counsel should have just skipped the rebuttal and cut to the chase and argued that they need their Doty back.

I hope Judge Nelson bans violins from her courtroom...