Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFL Files with NLRB

mav1234

By mav1234,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

We also do not know for certain that the NFL has refused any compromise. They are not issuing their stances publicly, so the only way we will know if that is the case is if the "last, best offer" is identical to the first offer... because the NFLPA is certainly not going to come out and say, "Oh yeah, the owners had concessions but we didn't like 'em"...

Not at all true. Each point in the CBA is a separate issue, meaning if the NFLPA and the owners agree on the rookie wage scale and the retirement benefits, but the owners try to force the 18 game season and the profit share down the players thoats making no concessions and telling them to take it or leave it, then the NFLPA can still file charges against the NFL for a lack of good faith bargaining. The NLRB considers the following when deciding if an unfair labor charge for surface bargaining has taken place (funny...I already posted this prior to the NLRB suit filed by the NFL today)

Prior bargaining history of the parties, parties' willingness to make concessions, character of exchanged proposals and demands, ANY dilatory tactics used during negotiations, conditions imposed by either party as necessary to reaching an agreement, unilateral changes made during the bargaining process in conditions subject to bargaining, communications by employer to individual employees, ANY unfair practices commiteed druing bargaining.

The owners have violated several of those considerations. The NLRB may be looking into the players union because of the owners suit, but this board is unbiased and implemented by the US Congress. They will not buy into the owners BS and they will uncover any boulwarism and surface bargaining tactics.

This is really going to get interesting...not like the NFL draft interesting, but interesting all the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wyank Rookie

Wyank

Posted
Posted

The NFLPA has no control over a lockout. The NFL owners are the only ones that control that. The NFLPA can strike if they do not agree to the final terms of the new CBA, but there is no new CBA, so that's not an option yet either.

Not entirely correct. A new CBA doesn't need to be agreed upon for the players to strike. The owners can declare an impasse after March 3rd. Then impose the last offer on the table before the impasse on the players. Work under that impasse next season or the players can strike if they don't agree with the forced impasse on them. At least according to talking heads, that is possible. I'm no lawyer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

Not entirely correct. A new CBA doesn't need to be agreed upon for the players to strike. The owners can declare an impasse after March 3rd. Then impose the last offer on the table before the impasse on the players. Work under that impasse next season or the players can strike if they don't agree with the forced impasse on them. At least according to talking heads, that is possible. I'm no lawyer.

An impasse is a stalemate that occurs in negotiations between union and management over the terms and conditions of employment. Impasses are often resolved through mediation or arbitration. The owners are not going to agree to an impasse that allows workers to continue working under the conditions of the old CBA agreement. They have made this VERY clear. They will lockout or force the new CBA through and force a player strike. Nothing is accomplished by allowing the old CBA to stay in place while negotiations take place to avoid a lockout or strike. This is not a real option. This may work for a factory where production can't stop or else economic losses will bankrupt the company, so they work through impasses, this is the NFL and the pockets are deep. A stop work will take place if a new agreement is not agreed on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

Okay Riddel we get it. You are pro union and support the players. Got it.

I'm not pro union and I don't support the players....I'm pro NFL football and I support the fans interest to see the best product on the field....GOD knows we pay enough to see it....why should we have to watch a subpar product? I could careless what ends up happening as long as the two parties clear it up and get the product back on the field so I can enjoy my football.....

The owners are screwing this thing up and Richardson is the ring leader....that's my only point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tondi Newbie

tondi

Posted
Posted

If the players made less maybe it wouldn't cost so much to go to a game or to watch games on cable/satellite TV. Higher player salaries will certainly result in both of those things being more expensive. If you don't like paying out the wazoo to watch football you should be on the side of the owners in this mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
  • Author
Posted

They will not buy into the owners BS and they will uncover any boulwarism and surface bargaining tactics.

This is really going to get interesting...not like the NFL draft interesting, but interesting all the same.

So you say things like this but still maintain you aren't on either side and just want the best product? Come on dude, it's clear what you think of the owners.

Don't you think that Smith would have engaged in litigation if he had as solid a case as you think and had the backing of the players? Do you really think he hasn't thought of these things yet? Considering the big decertification ordeal he had going, I don't think he's afraid of litigation to get the players what they want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

If the players made less maybe it wouldn't cost so much to go to a game or to watch games on cable/satellite TV. Higher player salaries will certainly result in both of those things being more expensive. If you don't like paying out the wazoo to watch football you should be on the side of the owners in this mess.

Neither the players or owners control the cost of ticket prices. The market dictates the price of tickets. The players could play for $1, but if the market dictates fans will pay $39 for an upper level seat, then the seat will cost $39.

Supply and demand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

So you say things like this but still maintain you aren't on either side and just want the best product? Come on dude, it's clear what you think of the owners.

Don't you think that Smith would have engaged in litigation if he had as solid a case as you think and had the backing of the players? Do you really think he hasn't thought of these things yet? Considering the big decertification ordeal he had going, I don't think he's afraid of litigation to get the players what they want.

Here is what I think. The players are represented by an idiot and they are not nearly as organized or united as the owners. The owners know this and they are going to bully their way through as long as the players union will allow it. I truely believe the owners made a mistake involving the NLRB at this point, because this will draw attention to both sides actions and the owners have not bargained in good faith. Now that the NLRB is involved this process is doomed to take it's course and we will be lucky to see any football in 2011.

It's a mess. That's what I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mountainpantherfan Newbie

mountainpantherfan

Posted
Posted

I'm not pro union and I don't support the players....I'm pro NFL football and I support the fans interest to see the best product on the field....GOD knows we pay enough to see it....why should we have to watch a subpar product? I could careless what ends up happening as long as the two parties clear it up and get the product back on the field so I can enjoy my football.....

The owners are screwing this thing up and Richardson is the ring leader....that's my only point.

No, thats you opinion. Just like every other comment on here. You're not an expert, even though you try to present yourself as one.

You and Happy Panther both think that your opinion in some way to better than anyone else. Thats fine, you wouldn't be the first on here to take that type of position. Just understand I come on here to have good conversations with other fans, not just listen to someone say I'm right over and over again without actually trying to have a conversation. TheyHateMe and I took two different points of view but respected each other.

Funny, how this entire thread is about how some of you think JR is such an asshole for being condensending yet this entire thread, thats the only stance you've taken.

Have fun, I'm out of this conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twylyght Rookie

twylyght

Posted
Posted

Neither the players or owners control the cost of ticket prices. The market dictates the price of tickets. The players could play for $1, but if the market dictates fans will pay $39 for an upper level seat, then the seat will cost $39.

Supply and demand.

Supply and demand would actually exist if it were within a free market vacuum. However, it is pretty clear that the free market doesn't exist in this case (or just about any other if you want to look down the barrel of this POVs logical and practical end). If it WERE an actual free market, then there would be alternatives to the NFL and there would be competing unions for said services.

That doesn't exist, so the usual maxims of supply and demand do not translate 1 for 1 as you suggest. If the NFLPA is allowed to bully the NFL into an unsustainable business model, then the only way to recoup costs is to pass it on to the customers.

This is precisely what happened in ATL when Arthur Blank took a HUGE hit at the ticket booth to get people in the stands his first year. He wanted to keep doing it, but he would have been out of business LONG ago if he continued on that course.

This isn't the ivory tower of academia here... this is the real world. The owners in the NFL haven't gotten to where they've gotten without an understanding of how the real business world works. They are simply trying to apply their practical real world acumen to the NFL business model in a modified fashion to see the league's continued success. If that process is hijacked by a legal dispute by the employees, the NFL will die a faster death than what Detroit has been rescued from... unless of course, we compell the American public to subsidize the NFL. God knows what will happen then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • frankw
      Deebo wants out of SF, and our current odds are high

      By frankw · Posted

      This is from 5 months ago. It was one or the other. Trade for one or draft one. We apparently called the Jets about Wilson. We also talked to the Seahawks about Metcalf. Drafting our own guy was the best course of action given the required investment. Regardless now is the time for Bryce Young to produce. We are fourth amongst all teams in cap spending on the OL. Back to back first round picks at WR and multiple young TE draft picks now. Very solid and respectable backfield. New pieces across the defense. The time is now.
    • Basbear
      Get ready for ‘SUPER MEN: The inside story of the 2015 Carolina Panthers’

      By Basbear · Posted

      That was just the worst time to have their worst game of the season. One key deal was the broncos guess the Panthers would NOT change any plays or flow to the game. Another key point overlook that bronco defense was truly one of the best in the NFL history. It was the best defense the Panthers faced that year, by far. They were not ready for it, but broncos were ready for the Panthers. Mix in that bad luck, poor refs showcase, and this is the golden boys last game........ Panthers needed to win by 20 and the broncos defense was not going to allow that.  Panthers were the faviotes and I believe they also thought that it was going to easier than them destorying NFC playoff teams as they marched to the SB. I've heard darin Gantt say the play calls were to give remmers help, but for some reason the team never did it. During the year they never had that problem, so maybe never practiced giving help via TE/RB, or WR chip. Cam was superman that year, no need for any adjustments...... Until you meet a legendary defense with studs at all levels, Think about it, Peyton was throwing wingless dunks for the whole season, the defense had to carry his corpse to the SB. That's how good they were, no many defense are able to get to the playoffs and win a SB without decent QB play. If you recall the beginning of that denfese took Tim Teblows and his non-throwing arse to the playoffs couple years before. That's insane the level of defense needed to overcome.   
    • TD alt
      Teddy Checkdown in trouble

      By TD alt · Posted

      Who cares if he paid for such small benefits out of his own pocket? The NCAA is a joke. They need to be offering such anyway, especially for Uber rides (which actually seems like a good idea).
×
×
  • Create New...