PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

I found this on profootballtalk.com

Status
Not open for further replies.

KDPPatsfan85

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
7,903
Reaction score
11,395
Not sure if this is mentioned in another thread, but someone I know who has been digging through the verdict has found something that may kill the NFL’s chances at appeal.

Specifically, they found where the NFLPA recertified in 1993, at the insistence of the NFL over Gene Upshaw’s objections, and that an agreement was made between the league and the NFLPA that the NFL couldn’t claim the NFLPA had done a sham decertification at any point in the future.

“Since 1993, the Players and the League have operated under the SSA. Among the
negotiated terms of the SSA, the Players, who had de-certified their union in order to
bring antitrust claims, acceded to the NFL’s demand that they re-certify their union within
30 days. As an apparent form of quid pro quo for that accession, the NFL agreed to
waive any right in the future to assert the non-statutory labor exemption, after the
expiration of the CBA, on the ground that the Players’ disclaimer was a sham or
otherwise ineffective to end the labor exemption. (See Doc. No. 43-1 (Declaration of
Barbara P. Berens, Ex. A (Amended SSA)) Art. XVIII § 5(b).)

In fact, Eugene Upshaw,who had served as the Executive Director of the NFLPA since 1983, has stated that the “only reason” he “agreed to recommend that the NFLPA be converted from a trade 11CASE 0:11-cv-00639-SRN-JJG Document 99 Filed 04/25/11 Page 11 of 89
association back into a union” was “because the owners demanded that as a condition for
the Settlement Agreement,” but only in exchange for the owners’ agreement that they
would not challenge any subsequent election to again decertify the NFLPA as their
collective bargaining representative. (Doc. No. 7-1 (Declaration of Richard A.
Berthelsen), ¶ 8 (emphasis in original).)”

Punitive damages for the NFLPA from the NFL, here we come.

This was a comment on this page- NFL: “We need a few days to sort this out” | ProFootballTalk

It makes a lot of sense and a lot of trouble for the owners to get the stay or the appeal!
 
This was a comment on this page- NFL: “We need a few days to sort this out” | ProFootballTalk

It makes a lot of sense and a lot of trouble for the owners to get the stay or the appeal!
the NFL agreed to
waive any right in the future to assert the non-statutory labor exemption, after the
expiration of the CBA
, on the ground that the Players’ disclaimer was a sham or
otherwise ineffective to end the labor exemption.

The bolded part is crucial because the CBA had not expired prior to decertification.
 
the NFL agreed to
waive any right in the future to assert the non-statutory labor exemption, after the
expiration of the CBA
, on the ground that the Players’ disclaimer was a sham or
otherwise ineffective to end the labor exemption.

The bolded part is crucial because the CBA had not expired prior to decertification.

Such is the wonders of legalese.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Patriots News 04-19, Countdown To Draft Day
Patriots News 04-19, Countdown To Draft Day
Steve Balestrieri
23 hours ago
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft 6 – A Week Before the Draft
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/13
Patriots News 04-12, What To Watch For In The NFL Draft
MORSE: Pre-Draft Patriots News and Notes
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft 5
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft 5
Mark Morse
2 weeks ago
Patriots Part Ways with Another Linebacker as Offseason Roster Shake-Up Continues
Patriots News 04-05, Mock Draft 2.0, Patriots Look For OL Depth
MORSE: 18 Game Schedule and Other Patriots Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Mike Vrabel Press Conference at the League Meetings 3/31
Back
Top