There will be a strike

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Dec 04, 2012 2:43 pm

:idea:
Fred wrote: Unions are the colossal mill stone around the left wing parties.

That is definitely the claim and for the undecided voter ( working poor,) its sad to think that it might be the truth that the rich wrap their lies in and sucker votes every four years.

In our province every time the NDP get into power or come close to power, the right claims that business will leave due to the unions and high taxes...

However, what if its all made up? What if in the big board rooms they decide to shelve investment, and close down plants, -not because the conditions aren't favourable, but because they just are manipulating democracy by fulfilling their right wing party buddies' fear mongering and getting favourable politicians and favourable policy.
(Not for business mind you, but policy that allows them to keep and accumulate even more wealth.)

We see mills close and mines close and think it the cart pulling the horse as if government and social policy actually have that kind of power in a global economy?

Perhaps it's not the existence of unions that's the problem but rather rich and powerful white men running things to their advantage behind closed doors

(I know call me a conspiracy nut but seriously, what if?)

Auto workers making $80 / hour, Hockey players making millions and then ....surprise surprise take umbrage if they're called on it as though it is now a God given right.

Honestly I thought selling your services to the highest bidder and the sacrosanctness of a binding contract was a God given right. But then again I was raised in a province where the far right have been in charge since Amor d' Cosmos...

Unions were initially a necessity, it restored a balance between powerful business and the guy that was pulling on the rope. But it's now completely political supporting political goals rather than looking after their members.

I would think the logical conclusion from that observation is that the people and organizations on the other side of the negotiating table have changed from Ebenezer Scrooge too. It's a global economy with the World Bank and IMF who are even more political...


I was a union member at one time. But here's the reason why, I was free to make my own choice if I joined or not I was not bludgeoned by those that insisted i couldn't work unless I was a member.


Collective bargaining is a bitch...but it works .


And by the way even the UK, once a bastion of unionism no longer demands union membership to have a job or work. Unions cannot be considered democratic

They are the definition of democratic people who join together in common cause... What you are taking about is pure propaganda by those who stand to lose from that collective protection.

Auto workers unions ,amongst others, did as much damage in ensuring work be sent overseas as the companies that followed that route.

When I helped my cousin with the starter on her vauxhall I was stunned to find I was looking at a GM cavalier under the hood...it is an identical car underneath the sheet metal skin.
Including the complete shitty planned obsolescence of all American cars...the real reason that foreign manufactured cars have stomped the shit out of North America.

The banks and the auto makers sell you debt in the guise of a piece of crap car that falls apart right away and people flock to German and Japanese cars and its the unions fault??

Not only that but the unions also invested their pension plans into the companies that moved overseas ie they supported the move !!

Cause the corporations offer such great retirement plans...

Unions are not democratic. They, NHLPA, frankly express no concern about the players that will have retirement shoved down their throats. Just like the old union organizers using a baseball bat to enforce solidarity the PA members like to prevent open discussion and impart fear regarding any one opening their mouths.


That manager from Detroit with the 200 grand fine from the NHL for offering his private opinion publicly says hello...

The NHLPA members have completely lost sight that they are paid multi millions for playing a game they love, there's not many other brothers that can say that. No concern or side about their union brothers forced out of work by their actions, it's simply greed before every thing. They like to dress it up as a moral fight ...it isn't it's greed first and foremost.

Well yeah, greed is the reason the whole system works anyway. Everyone is motivated by greed, why should players not be allowed?


What ever you might say about the owners ...they're the ones that take 100% of the risk and put up countless millions to promote and develop the league.

Can't buy that one, except for a few privately built and funded rinks [Griffiths, GM Place] most have been built with at least some if not mostly public money so its not 100% risk...

The players take no such risk ( they're insured up to their eye balls ...by guess who free enterprise )

Manny says hi ...what's the premium for insurance that replaces an eyeball I wonder?



and even in the minimum make enough is one season that should ensure a good standard of living for the rest of their life's and if they invest wisely can continue to compound that salary ( investing in the business world you so abhor ) to finally fall from their perch a lot wealthier than when they were born. To me that sounds like a winner :D :D

So what you are saying is that workers rights and civil rights have a means test?
if its a Walmart greeter solidarity has its place
But
If we pay you enough you should enjoy indentured servitude....

BTW
I heard some one compare pro athletes to musicians you buy the album and some goes to the recording company and some goes to the artist.. . but which one works for which?
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2426
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Fred » Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:31 pm

The thing that stood out to me is your comparison of American shit cars. It fits your general view IMO. I can tell you this. My current auto has 186,000+ KM and it's a 06, never had any problems. The previous auto ( Safari GM ) last 16 years and had 460,000 Km on it. As you can see I run my cars hard and long and I can't complain. Vauxhall from the fities used US engines. Not alone but they have been using them.

The reason the Auto workers are in part responsible for the movement of business overseas is they've frankly held the Auto business hostage and have now over rpiced them selves. With the advent of the Containor vessels transportation woes that held world business in check for centuries was broken. Containor vessels chnaged the landscape of the world. I'm surprised you want to condem the exteremely poor around the world to another century of hunger and child mortality, just to boost some auto worker ...unless your tied in some way directly to unionism. About 15 years ago ...15 years ! the Longshore Foremens union went on strike. It turned out they were making $175,000/year. When it became known the strike was over real quick the public turned against them. I spoke to a chap in the ILWU who told me he was making around $500 a day, Sundays mind you but not bad a for a grade 10 educations. Nurses make significantly less ...why is that ? well the ILWU holds control of the nations business. Nurses just hold individual life's in their hands.

When ever the union permit workers to CHOOSE if they want to belong to a union then I will give them careful consideration. Until them I will continue them to be branded as a non democratic organization. It would help if these many overpaid under skilled took a dose of reality now and then. Your car and mine may be a lot less expensive, for a start, ditto the NHLPA. I used to spend $25 per tickets now i spend $70 per ticket for an NHL game. These guys take zero risk, invest zero money or wealth but want a return greater than the guy that did put up the money and take the risks. AND THEN IHAVE THE NERVE TO INVEST BACK INTO BUSINESS THEY CONDEM :wow: How does that make sense. Why do unions need to make belong to the union mandatory if they were doing such a great job? They're riddled with corruption... just ask Mr Hoffer :D

Sorry I can't do the line by line bit to much wasted time for me :lol:

As to the bankers and global economics I couldn't agree more with you, out of hand and lost ethics
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Dec 04, 2012 4:30 pm

Fred wrote:The thing that stood out to me is your comparison of American shit cars. It fits your general view IMO. I can tell you this. My current auto has 186,000+ KM and it's a 06, never had any problems. The previous auto ( Safari GM ) last 16 years and had 460,000 Km on it. As you can see I run my cars hard and long and I can't complain. Vauxhall from the fities used US engines. Not alone but they have been using them.

Seriously, you had a GM with 460k on it? Wow that's impressive, but did it have the same alternator, starter, fuel pump, transmission, cylinder heads, water pump etc?
Cause every American owned car I have ever owned ( built after 1973)
Was total crap and had one or all of the above replaced at least once...
( my daughter has a 96 mustang with a v6 that's blown a head gasket at 186,000kms. It's cheaper to put in a second hand motor than to replace the gaskets except, almost every used V6 out there has blown head gaskets as well because Ford built Em all with shitty materials and put out a repair advisory until the next model run.)

Not saying my Toyota or Honda have been perfect but those makes regularly turn half a million Kliks with no issues whatsoever ...and yeah I know they are technically built with non union workers but they also treat them as if they were in unions.

As for Vauxhall, Opel and Ford of Europe- all American owned companies and all make the identical crap cars that are too easy to get financing for.
I'll bet there is something else in common, they are profit first everything else second corporations. They don't care about investing in their own future, they care about returns for their stock holders today... Tomorrow is not a concern until tomorrow becomes today and then the concern is returns for the stockholder.

I think the Jeremy Jacobs and Rocky Wirtz and other NHL are of the same cloth. suck every dollar every day ....
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2426
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Potatoe1 » Tue Dec 04, 2012 5:09 pm

It's been about 30 pages or so but I would like to once again note that comparing the NHLPA to the traditional labour union is totally absurd .

Traditional unions generally increase labor costs and reduce efficiency. They are about people with little to no barganing power coming together and improving their lot in life. The NHLPA on the other hand actually reduces over all compensation and improves the efficiency of the over all business.Yes the low end guys do better but salaries as a whole are actually lower because of the NHLPA.

In other words if the players kick the union the owners would likely spend more on salary and the over all product would likely be worse.

Further to that we are talking abut people who earn 500k to 12 mill.

Stop trying to draw comparisons it's totally absurd to do so.
Last edited by Potatoe1 on Tue Dec 04, 2012 5:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Tue Dec 04, 2012 5:09 pm

Fred wrote:Yeah but in most contracts you can't charge the NHL team if (A) the other party does not do every thing to mitigate the losses. (B) they can't charge rental if they're making money by renting out the arena to other parties. One would hope that even community owned facilities are on the ball, Community owned facilities still need to run their facilities to make a profit ( a dirty word I would think for you :wink: )

I have to think that the constant complaint by players that the NHL has a date in mind might have legs


No Fred the people that own these teams should turn over 100 % of their earnings to the players. No fucking way should they want to turn any sort of profit. The players are the show here.

I wonder if the people who constantly lick the asscrack of the players will be able to wath the games if the deal doesn't go down exactly like they think it should. The sour taste in their mouths may turn them off NHL hockey for good.

I agree with a lot of what Pot said in his post but as I said ultimatley the owners are the boss regardless of what the finger puppets would lead you to believe.
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3092
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Dec 04, 2012 5:54 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:It's been about 30 pages or so but I would like to once again note that comparing the NHLPA to the traditional labour union is totally absurd .

Traditional unions generally increase labor costs and reduce efficiency. They are about people with little to no barganing power coming together and improving their lot in life. The NHLPA on the other hand actually reduces over all compensation and improves the efficiency of the over all business.Yes the low end guys do better but salaries as a whole are actually lower because of the NHLPA.

In other words if the players kick the union the owners would likely spend more on salary and the over all product would likely be worse.

Further to that we are talking abut people who earn 500k to 12 mill.

Stop trying to draw comparisons it's totally absurd to do so.

Once again I would point out that how much the players make is irrelevant to this discussion.
It's about owners trying to lower labour costs and employees trying to retain their pay....
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2426
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Fred » Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:16 pm

ukcanuck wrote:Once again I would point out that how much the players make is irrelevant to this discussion.
It's about owners trying to lower labour costs and employees trying to retain their pay....



Oh Yeah that's like Fund Managers saying the same thing about their bonuses. The amount is irrelevant :D

Any it occured to me today to make the new CBA idiot proof so neither agents or GM's can find the loop holes why don't they make teams subject to top end salaries. ie each team allowed 2 players x $6.5K : 4 players x up to $3.5 K ; 10 x $2.0K etc etc and max term 5 years. PLUS each team permitted 5 waivers not subject to waiver claims per season so no matter who you are they can send you down at n% of your salary. Keep players just turning up for a game without putting out players like Carter when he was with Columbus
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:24 pm

Fred wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:Once again I would point out that how much the players make is irrelevant to this discussion.
It's about owners trying to lower labour costs and employees trying to retain their pay....



Oh Yeah that's like Fund Managers saying the same thing about their bonuses. The amount is irrelevant :D

Any it occured to me today to make the new CBA idiot proof so neither agents or GM's can find the loop holes why don't they make teams subject to top end salaries. ie each team allowed 2 players x $6.5K : 4 players x up to $3.5 K ; 10 x $2.0K etc etc and max term 5 years. PLUS each team permitted 5 waivers not subject to waiver claims per season so no matter who you are they can send you down at n% of your salary. Keep players just turning up for a game without putting out players like Carter when he was with Columbus

Actually except for the waiver part, I think the owners have already turned that kind of salary structure down... They want the salary cap linked to annual revenues so that it never costs them out of their end. They want a sliding scale, kind of like when you go to the bank and tell them you made 10 percent less this month so your mortgage payment will be 10 percent less... wonder how your bank would react to that?
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2426
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Fred » Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:36 pm

You can still have a max and a minimum salary Cap, you don't have to pay the top two players the top level but you can't pay them more than that same for the other pay grades. You have to fit the total roster figure within the Cap.

One thing none of these guys will need to do is have problems with their mortgages :lol:

I'll bet there is something else in common, they are profit first everything else second corporations. They don't care about investing in their own future, they care about returns for their stock holders today... Tomorrow is not a concern until tomorrow becomes today and then the concern is returns for the stockholder.
You better hope they want to take care of their profits because I'm betting every Union Pension fund hold stock in those companies.

The difference between toyota workers and GM workers is Toyota doesn't have to deal with restrictive practises, there's no "them and us attitude " which is prevalent in union shops. More politics than Carter has pills. My daughter was forced to sign with a Union and conditions and especally attitudes has gone down the tube, you can't do that or this. She looking for a new job. There was a young man working there for years doing simple jobs, he was handicapped, he was paid well above minimum wage. The first thing the Union did was demand he fall within their guidelines and demanded he be paid double what he was being paid. That post has now been closed and the young man will never get another job period, paying what he was paid. If...if he gets another job it will be minimum wage, he's lost all his friends from work, shame on them
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Jovocop » Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:51 pm

ukcanuck wrote:
Fred wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:Once again I would point out that how much the players make is irrelevant to this discussion.
It's about owners trying to lower labour costs and employees trying to retain their pay....



Oh Yeah that's like Fund Managers saying the same thing about their bonuses. The amount is irrelevant :D

Any it occured to me today to make the new CBA idiot proof so neither agents or GM's can find the loop holes why don't they make teams subject to top end salaries. ie each team allowed 2 players x $6.5K : 4 players x up to $3.5 K ; 10 x $2.0K etc etc and max term 5 years. PLUS each team permitted 5 waivers not subject to waiver claims per season so no matter who you are they can send you down at n% of your salary. Keep players just turning up for a game without putting out players like Carter when he was with Columbus

Actually except for the waiver part, I think the owners have already turned that kind of salary structure down... They want the salary cap linked to annual revenues so that it never costs them out of their end. They want a sliding scale, kind of like when you go to the bank and tell them you made 10 percent less this month so your mortgage payment will be 10 percent less... wonder how your bank would react to that?


Is it really a valid example? The situation is more like there are 30 sister companies. Some are making money and some are not. In order to keep all the 700 employees employed, something has to be done. Are the owners greedy? Yes, they are but they are also the one who invested millions of dollars. Imagine that you own a restaurant and your chefs and waitresses want over 50% of the revenue when they invest nothing but their "skills". Would you be okay with it?
User avatar
Jovocop
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby okcanuck » Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:42 pm

Could it be that they are finally coming to their senses tonight? Christ I hope the meeting tonight starts the ball rolling and the owners and players can finally come to the conclusion that they don't need Buttman and Feur(a couple of fucking high priced lawyers who wouldn't know a puck from a car battery).
User avatar
okcanuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 502
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:11 am
Location: Bestwank,BC

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:37 pm

Jovocop wrote:
Is it really a valid example?

Okay it's an oversimplification to some degree but in its essence it amounts to a small business trying to control its costs by linking them to revenue which is a luxury few if any have.


The situation is more like there are 30 sister companies. Some are making money and some are not. In order to keep all the 700 employees employed, something has to be done. Are the owners greedy? Yes, they are but they are also the one who invested millions of dollars. Imagine that you own a restaurant and your chefs and waitresses want over 50% of the revenue when they invest nothing but their "skills". Would you be okay with it?

I guess if I owned a restaurant that catered to the kind of people that pay 300 dollar tickets, I'd make damn sure that the chef and servers were the best money could buy and I would pay them to keep them because without them I got a kitchen and tables and chairs but no restaurant. Actually that's an apt example as I am sure Topper would agree that the chef is everything and with him or her rests the business all other things being equal...

Anyway, way back at the beginning of this lockout I heard with my own ears Fehr suggest they leave everything as it is but work out what the figure is that the ailing teams need and create a fund 50/50 of the players and solvent owners to subsidize the weak sisters...

What's wrong with something like that ??
Last edited by ukcanuck on Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2426
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Lancer » Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:39 pm

Jovocop wrote:Imagine that you own a restaurant and your chefs and waitresses want over 50% of the revenue when they invest nothing but their "skills". Would you be okay with it?


If, in your example, you also controlled the chefs' and waitresses' ability to work elsewhere, when they can negotiate a new contract, fine them and suspend them through a kangaroo court system where you ultimately hold the veto on appeal, then maybe your example could approach the same validity.

Blob Mckenzie wrote:I wonder if the people who constantly lick the asscrack of the players will be able to wath the games if the deal doesn't go down exactly like they think it should. The sour taste in their mouths may turn them off NHL hockey for good.


If the players cave and give in to the owners demands, they'll have no one to blame but themselves and I can't have much sympathy. If they get a better deal than what's on the table now, bully for them. I'll likely still watch the games afterwards regardless of when and regardless of outcome, with the hope that one day the league will be run somewhat better than a dog circus.

BTW Blobby, if I'm licking athletic ass-crack you may want to wipe Jeremy Jacobs' jizz off your chin. :P
Love the Sport. Love the Team.

Hate the League.
User avatar
Lancer
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1367
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:41 am
Location: Arnprior, Ontario

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Strangelove » Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:52 pm

BurningBeard wrote:I gotta wonder, no mater what ends up happening, if this whole disaster is the beginning of the end for Bettman. The rumors are he set expectations for a "home run" on the owners side, and I doubt that's going to happen. Regardless, don't you at some point need to replace your wartime general with a peacetime general?


Bettman has 4 or 5 more years on his contract at $8mil per, he'll be around for awhile. :drink:

Besides, peace is for sissies...
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7370
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:53 pm

Strangelove wrote:
BurningBeard wrote:I gotta wonder, no mater what ends up happening, if this whole disaster is the beginning of the end for Bettman. The rumors are he set expectations for a "home run" on the owners side, and I doubt that's going to happen. Regardless, don't you at some point need to replace your wartime general with a peacetime general?


Bettman has 4 or 5 more years on his contract at $8mil per, he'll be around for awhile. :drink:

Besides, peace is for sissies...


and Palestinian supporters apparently...
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2426
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests