Union Shitcans the League's Realignment Proposal

[Captain Iago]

Guessing the NHLPA isn't getting what it wants in return for accepting the league's realignment proposal. Could get ugly...

Link

 

[Uman85]

**** unions.

 

[Jntg4]

 

[Jntg4]

**** unions.

Especially Teachers' Unions.

 

[Uman85]

Especially Teachers' Unions.

:yep:

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

Getting the new CBA off to a fantastic start.

 

[Captain Iago]

Especially Teachers' Unions.

:yep:

Take it somewhere else, please.

 

[southern_cross_116]

Take it somewhere else, please.

Seconded.

___

Interesting negotiation tactic; as I presume negotiations are supposed to be confidential - and recognizing the simple fact that said story was loaded with editorial comments, but did not point to any players' association issues.

In other words, outside of the topic of the story, the rest of it was basically a story loaded up with an editorial. Personally I would think getting the job done, would probably be a smarter way to go than egage in publicity stunts.


CBC article: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/story/2012/01/06/sp-nhl-realignment.html

 

[Jntg4]

Why the **** the NHLPA have to approve who plays what teams and who goes to the playoffs anyway?

The players themselves all seemed to like it, so is this just the association's head doing this?

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

The players themselves all seemed to like it, so is this just the association's head doing this?

Getting the new CBA off to a fantastic start.

that.

 

[Captain Iago]

Why the **** the NHLPA have to approve who plays what teams and who goes to the playoffs anyway?

The players themselves all seemed to like it, so is this just the association's head doing this?

The link SC provided explained it:

As realignment affects players’ terms and conditions of employment, the CBA requires the League to obtain the NHLPA’s consent before implementation.

Both sides agreed and both sides have to live up to agreement prior to implementation.

Weaver, player rep for the Panthers, shared this:

“We weren't given enough information [from the NHL],'' said defenseman Mike Weaver, Florida's union rep.

“How can you make an educated decision without the information? We asked and were upfront with them. We weren't provided anything. They weren't open for discussion. The PA is looking out for us. Travel is an important thing. .-.-. I think we're being fair with them. They don't want to divulge anything to us.''

 

[ZDemp34]

Well this is dumb. Something that had about a 95% approval rating (according to Pat Foley) doesn't go through because of a dumb players' union, even though most of the players actually supported this....lolwut?

 

[Captain Iago]

Well this is dumb. Something that had about a 95% approval rating (according to Pat Foley) doesn't go through because of a dumb players' union, even though most of the players actually supported this....lolwut?

If 95% approval was truly the case, then the players have every right to fire Fehr since he's acting on his own behalf instead of the players' behalf.

Consider the source, though too...Foley works for the organIzation.

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

Yeah, Foley was doin a lot of yapping on the subject without really providing any depth.

Love Pat more than just about anything, but I wouldn't look for too much hard hitting analysis from him unless it's about Alex Karpovtsev (rip).

 

[Captain Iago]

Yeah, Foley was doin a lot of yapping on the subject without really providing any depth.

Love Pat more than just about anything, but I wouldn't look for too much hard hitting analysis from him unless it's about Alex Karpovtsev (rip).

Aye, and he had to wait until he was flipped to voice his hard hitting analysis. He knows not to bite the hand that feeds.

 

[Everyday I'm Byfuglien]

going off topic for a second...

Eddie seemed to have an inordinate amount of "shout outs" tonight. It really bugged me, though the game on the ice wasn't helping, and it made me long for the days of Billy Gardner.

I'm 90% sure that "Diana Olczyk's chocolate chip cookies" is some kind of freaky swingers code for some dirty sex act that appeals to Pat and Eddie.

And if it is, I'd like to change my username here to Diana Olczyk's Cookies

 

[tbo41fan]

Take it somewhere else, please.

This.






This is all about the CBA...the players now have something they can hold against the owners

another long drawn out NBA-esque labor dispute would be terrible for the NHL

 

[Jntg4]

Anyone remember when the CCS CBA couldn't be reached? Pretty intense shit.

 

[nwfisch]

 

[southern_cross_116]

Question:

And did Foley mention where he got his "95%" from?

Because, my thinking is that in the absence of a source that is akin to pulling it out of thin air (or well you name a spot...). That's called 'spin.'

Ok- play devil's advocate for a second; consider this realignment thing a red herring (or maybe more accurately, 'not the big fish'), say that management expects something less than a smooth bargaining period (the ownerships version of Austerity basically amounted to a lot of whining, some big pay cuts, a salary cap followed by -well you guessed it -spiralling salaries and jigged contracts to allegedly circumvent it.).

Is there a better way to try to shift public opinion prior to engaging in negotiations than dropping in some heavily editorialised story, prior to the start?


Ok hold on to above-- as the NHLPA has a statement on their site - compare and constrast.

STATEMENT FROM NHLPA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DON FEHR REGARDING PROPOSED REALIGNMENT

Two substantial Player concerns emerged: (1) whether the new structure would result in increased and more onerous travel; and (2) the disparity in chances of making the playoffs between the smaller and larger divisions.

In order to evaluate the effect on travel of the proposed new structure, we requested a draft or sample 2012-13 schedule, showing travel per team. We were advised it was not possible for the League to do that. We also suggested reaching an agreement on scheduling conditions to somewhat alleviate Player travel concerns (e.g., the scheduling of more back-to-back games, more difficult and lengthier road trips, number of border crossings, etc.), but the League did not want to enter into such a dialogue. The travel estimation data we received from the League indicates that many of the current Pacific and Central teams, that have demanding travel schedules under the current format, could see their travel become even more difficult. On the playoff qualification matter, we suggested discussing ways to eliminate the inherent differences in the proposed realignment, but the League was not willing to do so.

The League set a deadline of January 6, 2012 for the NHLPA to provide its consent to the NHL’s proposal. Players’ questions about travel and concerns about the playoff format have not been sufficiently addressed; as such, we are not able to provide our consent to the proposal at this time. We continue to be ready and willing to have further discussions should the League be willing to do so.

See the deal here is that if you give up your right to negotiate, then (and I am a little surprised that it has to be spelled out) -that is a pretty bad thing. It also doen't look like a no, but the league needs to provide some answers.

I found the statement on the NHL.com site to be filled with hyperbole, and probably intended to provoke a general reaction from parties not affected by the current CBA.

And then there is this, if you can't abide by the current CBA, then how exactly are you going to negotiate the upcoming one?

My advice to parties not directly affected, is please try not to bite on things, hook, line, and sinker.