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

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Tue Sep 18, 2012 6:01 pm

Tantalum wrote: keep in mind this ideologically bankrupt person has fully supported unions in the past.
OMG  I said:
ukcanuck wrote:it's only hockey I know and it's only millionaires versus billionaires and all of that. However, there is greater moral struggle going on here and it's depressing as hell how ideologically bankrupt your point of view is. Its precisely the idea that we are all in it for ourselves and fuck you too that allows for corporate greed, outsourcing, downward pressure on wages to exist at all. "
In response to this:
Tantalum wrote: There comes a point when solidarity goes out the window and you start looking out for #1
It's this ideology that is "Ideologically bankrupt"and maybe even morally bankrupt as well depending on what meeting you are at.  I did not insinuate or imply anything other than exactly what I said.  I'm did  not call anyone either morally or ideologically bankrupt. I said "your" point of view is ideologically bankrupt which is different to calling you ideologically bankrupt unless you literally are your opinion but obviously by your own admission, your point of changes from circumstance to circumstance which is completely expected understandable.

I'm beginning to wonder if we actually read each others posts or just react to words whether they are in context or not...? 
 
(I'm including myself by the way)

Btw thanks for more precise explanation of the escrow,
I take issue though with the, it's  not their money in the first place"
Statement as it comes from their contracts and held in escrow and yes they (players)  agreed to the arrangement but it's more accurate to say that had no real choice given the events if that lockout 

(Topper) same thing with HRR, the definition of it was secured by force of the past lockout and not a willing agreement.

(Pot) I don't think that concert money is HRR, I was merely pointing out that the definition is up to interpretation as a case could be made that the rent from other events is related to existence of the hockey club (in Vancouver's case anyway)

(Topper) I see your lol and raise you roflmao :)

FAN
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 341
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:55 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by FAN » Tue Sep 18, 2012 6:05 pm

I always wonder about the solidarity of the owners. It's amazing that say the owners of NYR, Canucks, and Leaves would vote for a lockout when they stand to lose so much in profits. But I guess it's for the greater good.

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Tue Sep 18, 2012 9:03 pm

tantalum wrote:Per,

It's been said over and over again on various boards that owners in North American pro sports leagues will never ever again carry on without a CBA in place. They will always lock out the players. Every league. Every time. Why? Because the guy heading the NHLPA right now led the baseball players on a strike that cancelled the playoffs and world series in 1994. No league will ever trust the union to negotiate in good faith and not use the playoffs or other premiere events as leverage...especially a union led by Fehr.

It would be nice of course but that hope died in 1994 not due to uber-rich owners but a union.
Is it not true that the baseball strike was a direct result of MLB owners trying to force a salary cap in that sport by withholding pension fund contributions until the union accepted ther proposal?
Kind of sounds like the owners started that mess by forcing the union's hand. Not exactly the same tactic here but close enough, take our deal or starve until you do...
Seriously can't see anyone reacting all warm and fuzzy all over with that treatment.

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Tue Sep 18, 2012 9:40 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
tantalum wrote:Per,

It's been said over and over again on various boards that owners in North American pro sports leagues will never ever again carry on without a CBA in place. They will always lock out the players. Every league. Every time. Why? Because the guy heading the NHLPA right now led the baseball players on a strike that cancelled the playoffs and world series in 1994. No league will ever trust the union to negotiate in good faith and not use the playoffs or other premiere events as leverage...especially a union led by Fehr.

It would be nice of course but that hope died in 1994 not due to uber-rich owners but a union.
No kidding....

Per give your head a shake....

Given Fehr's history, the owners would be out of their minds to play out the season with no agreement in place.
the PA would go on strike over what exactly? they don't like the CBA they've played under since 04? I admit it's unlikely the league is ever going to negotiate any concessions without a lockout unless they agree to the rich clubs matching any rollback or revenue sharing. That's more likely why they won't have a season, because lockouts work.

User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: There will be a strike

Post by tantalum » Wed Sep 19, 2012 6:21 am

Well given the PA is running away from full linkage except at levels that are too high and giving themselves guaranteed raises no matter what revenue growth is like in their proposals I'd say the likelihood of them using a snap strike at a crucial time to gain a concession of no linkage is pretty darn good. Even if they go and sign some sort of document that says they won't strike it wouldn't be good enough. On the eve of the Stanley Cup final the players go on strike, even if illegally based on the paper they signed, and hold things up in the courts while emabarassing the league at a crucial time. That isn't to say they would do it but the the possibility exists and the league would be stupid to go forward without a lockout because of it. Had Fehr not played the game he did in 1994 they would likely be playing.... On a similar note the league would also be stupid for not having full linkage so that if revenues do flatline or drop the mechanism to adjust things is absent. Just because revenues seem like they should grow over the course of the CBA doesn't mean you ignore the other possibility no matter how slim. The linkage mechanism needs to be present.

Note that Fehr was a major confidant and advisor of Goodenow when Goodenow made his move of "we'll sit out for 2 years and won't accept a cap". Fehr looks to be beginning to play the same game. It didn't work out last time and I don't think it'll work out this time. The players have done exceedingly well under the current CBA framework and would continue to do so after some tweaking. They are not interested in discussing what tweaking needs to be done. They are not interested in acknowledging another side of the balance sheet exists. A fair deal framework exists from the last two offers from the league and the PA is not interested in negotiating. It's turning into Goodenow part 2. The real question is if the players let it go as far this time as they did last time.


And speaking of ideologically bankrupt... the players have a huge problem making millions under even the worst offer the league has brought forward but have no issues going overseas, playing for a fraction of the salary and taking another players job in that other league. All they do in the end IS look out for #1. As I said, good for the SEL to stand up and say if you want to play that's fine but then you are here for the year (i.e. you are here because you want to be and not just because you want to pocket some money for staying in shape and practicing).

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Wed Sep 19, 2012 6:52 am

tantalum wrote:Well given the PA is running away from full linkage except at levels that are too high and giving themselves guaranteed raises no matter what revenue growth is like in their proposals I'd say the likelihood of them using a snap strike at a crucial time to gain a concession of no linkage is pretty darn good. Even if they go and sign some sort of document that says they won't strike it wouldn't be good enough. On the eve of the Stanley Cup final the players go on strike, even if illegally based on the paper they signed, and hold things up in the courts while emabarassing the league at a crucial time. That isn't to say they would do it but the the possibility exists and the league would be stupid to go forward without a lockout because of it. Had Fehr not played the game he did in 1994 they would likely be playing....


On a similar note the league would also be stupid for not having full linkage so that if revenues do flatline or drop the mechanism to adjust things is absent. Just because revenues seem like they should grow over the course of the CBA doesn't mean you ignore the other possibility no matter how slim. The linkage mechanism needs to be present.
You're refereeing to the link between the cap and revenue? If so the raises are totally up to management and anyone under contract will only receive what's on the contract? I would point to fehr's and the players public willingness to work with the owners to solve this....
However I don't disagree with the need for a workstoppage to get it done. I mean look at us around here and how upset we're all getting. imagine If it were our money. (im aware of the irony of that statement:) ) it's the reason why it's the eleventh hour, the only time polar extremes come together.

User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: There will be a strike

Post by tantalum » Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:52 am

ukcanuck wrote: I would point to fehr's and the players public willingness to work with the owners to solve this....
There has been no willingness. They refuse to acknowledge even the possibility that expenses have outpaced revenue growth and need to be controlled (salary is the biggest of these expenses and some of the only ones they have some control over). Given the same thing has happened in just about every other business over the course of time of this past CBA I see no reason to doubt that it has indeed happened in the NHL as well. The players have yet to acknowledge anything other than they'd really just like some more money regardless of the economics of the league.

User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: There will be a strike

Post by tantalum » Wed Sep 19, 2012 12:09 pm

Modano on the issue:
"In hindsight, it wasn't worth it," he told ESPN The Magazine for a story gauging former players' opinions of the last lockout. "It was a waste of time. We thought we were stronger than we were. We started falling apart as the months clicked by."
....
"It's money you feel you never get back. At some point, we were sold a bill of goods," he said. "Everybody was buying it. Everybody thought, 'Let's not let each other down. Let's do it for the future of the game. Blah, blah, blah.' You're only in the game so long."
....
"I would say (to them) that it's not a battle you're going to feel like you're going to win," he said. "It's a negotiation. You feel at some point that both sides will be upset about what they have to give up."
Now of course Modano was having trouble feeding his dogs...

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/83960 ... st-lockout

User avatar
vic
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 922
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 5:29 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by vic » Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:57 pm

How anybody can support the owners after reading this is beyond me:
Funny thing, though. You might think with all that practice Bettman and the owners would be a little smoother at trying to pull the wool over the fans' eyes. It was bad enough they spent the months leading up to the lockout bragging about record revenues in the seven years since the last lockout that saw the NHL grow from a $2.1-billion (all currency U.S.) business to a $3.3-billion one only to plead poverty a few days later. Not only that, one of the guys at the table demanding the players take a 24-per-cent pay cut because the salary cap system they demanded and won after an entire season was lost in 2004-05 is now not working, Minnesota Wild owner Craig Leipold, was fresh from signing two good but not great players to 13-year contracts worth $98-million each.

Full article: http://m.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hoc ... ice=mobile

dbr
CC Legend
Posts: 3048
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by dbr » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:08 pm

Elliotte Friedman with (as usual) a great article - this one delving into the specifics of the HRR squabble.

It may be old news for some but as someone who refused to pay any attention to this mess as long as there was anything hockey related to read instead, I found it pretty informative.

Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Potatoe1 » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:54 pm

dbr wrote:Elliotte Friedman with (as usual) a great article - this one delving into the specifics of the HRR squabble.

It may be old news for some but as someone who refused to pay any attention to this mess as long as there was anything hockey related to read instead, I found it pretty informative.
The article is quite good, however like most of the hockey media he is missing the point of the players proposal;
With the National Hockey League wanting player costs to drop immediately and the NHL Players' Association proposing instead to slow salaries against revenue growth, we're at an impasse. And the overwhelming answer to a question about how the gap can be bridged?
That isn't really what the players proposed.

The players proposed to remove linkage in exchange for a plan based around their own growth estimates.

The owners then have the option to revert back to the current 57% linked system or negotiate a new deal under the deadline that the players want.

If the players had proposed to keep the current system but reduce things slowly by say 2% per year, down to say 50%, (which is what most media types incorrectly believe they have) then we would probably be very close to a deal.

The media seem to be perpetuating the notion that the League needs an immediate reduction in order to make a deal. I do not think that is the case at all. I think the majority of owners are worried about their long term ROI and are looking at a system that will generate them long term returns and increase the asset value of their team.

The players on the other hand are probably totally against any type of roll back and rightfully so. They negotiated their contracts in good faith and would like to keep as much of them as possible.

That is probably where the resolution resides. The players will get to keep their current contracts and the owners will get the long term guaranteed profits that they are after.

User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: There will be a strike

Post by tantalum » Thu Sep 20, 2012 5:47 pm

Interestingly, Paul Kelly the PA leader ousted by Lindros, Hargrove and Pink (likely before Kelly's forensic auditors revealed the millions of dollars of union money LIndros and pals were spending) says the solution should be as simple as that Pot. The league IMO has honestly shown they are at least somewhat amenable to that type of proposal....they just ain't going to go there until the PA comes to the table under the same system.

The Friedman article does lay out some things but I think it also shows the players aren't in reality when they talk about the finances. The players seem to honestly think that for every dollar of concession or merchandise they should get 57 cents. Which is absurd. Sell a shirt for $20 and $11.40 goes to the players while after overheads, merchandise cost, salary etc about a buck would go to the owners. In the end Guerin is correct when he was talking about the NBA lock out. It's the owners league, they pay well, they can do what they want. Just accept it and move on.

Note on that Flames site a guy is posting that his NHL playing acquaintance (Salvador) is saying about 40% of the players want to settle now but the younger players and stars are telling them just to let the PA handle it. IF such a claim is truthful and accurate the PA will splinter quickly (though not a squickly as I thought as I forgot that in October they will get their escrow refunds from the year before which will help the players out).

Also of note today:

Bobby Mac on TSN radio saying that the players he talked to think about 22 or the 30 owners want to settle and that they only need to turn 2 more to get by the Bettman veto. On the other hand the OWNER he talked to says the number is exactly the opposite with 22 teams firmly behind Bettman and 8 being okay with settling. If the PA is wrong they are going to get destroyed (22 backing Bettman would firmly would match the various financial numbers you see). I would imagine that if 22 teams wanted to settle that veto or not the NHL would be settling.

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 13234
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Hockey Widow » Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:22 pm

Neither side really has the stomach for a protracted lock out. But egos being what they are with very competitive people it will take someone to break down first. It makes you realize how lucky the league was to have players like Linden the last time around. He was vilified in some circles but what he helped bring home made the players better off than they have ever been.

The average player, the bottom pairing D'man, the 3rd and 4th liners, the back up goalies, they are the ones who will suffer as they are for the most part easily replaceable and with an already short career they stand to lose a significant part of it.

Its easy for the star players earning big bucks or the up and coming stars to say hold out. I'm sure a lot of the younger guys want to reach UFA earlier but if they paid attention last time, they were run over by the PA which gladly gave into the owners on entry level contracts.

The PA needs some vocal guys who know just what they stand to lose if this thing drags out. It's not the Crosby's or OV's who will suffer but the guys who do the spade work. They have a very limited window in the NHL. Hopefully there will be a few of them that can take charge.

As for the owners, the rich teams, the well off teams, they want to play now but unfortunately there are too many teams that don't make money until after the World Series that couldn't care less. Bettman has tight control and won't go down easily.

Its too much to hope for common sense. Last time around most people I talked to were polarized with respect to who they supported. This time most people seem on the fence, they see both sides and don't overtly support one over the other. That alone should send a message to both sides. Unfortunately it means squat to anyone.
The only HW the Canucks need

User avatar
Per
CC Legend
Posts: 3615
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Per » Fri Sep 21, 2012 4:56 am

Mondi wrote:And I must say, if the players want to be a union...you know with solidarity and what not. Any one of them who goes and takes a job from another professional in the same field is a speaking out of both sides of his mouth right...for them it's all about making money or is it all about fairness and jobs and protecting the players...hmm....
I disagree. Unions do not say that you cannot apply for jobs elsewhere. And in team sports you always look for better players to add to the team. Have you ever played sports on a team? Were you ever upset if a better player offered to play with your team? If so, I don't think you understand the concept of team sports. Heck, I've often heard fans here complain that some players should not be on the team. Making the cut is not an entitlement. It's a right you have to earn. If there are better players available, those players should play.

If there is a strike or a lockout, and someone accepts to work instead of those who are on strike are have been locked out - that's a scab. I think in Sweden it's even illegal.

Workers on strike also often consider members of other unions or non-union workers who stay on during a strike scabs, but from a legal standpoint (at least in Sweden) that's not true. At least as long as they do not do the work of those on strike. Eg if the nurses are on strike, a doctor or a janitor staying on to do his/her work is not a scab, unless they do work that the nurses are supposed to do.

But if there is a workplace that is not under conflict, there's no strike or lockout going on, the employer can always hire new people. Those people are not scabs. There is currently no conflict going on in the KHL or the SEL*.

The rules for firing people vary. In Sweden you cannot be fired without cause. The employer must have a valid reason. If you steal office supplies, if you do not do your job, if you are a hazard to those around you... Those are all valid reasons. But they need to be substantiated.

As for players in Europe losing their job... If they are under contract, the contract is still binding, and they should be paid in full, even if they are riding the pine. Not sure how things work in Russia, I hear it's pretty lawless. Kind of like Chicago in the 1920's, so I guess there may be people there that get screwed over, but that's probably with or withot Ovechkin playing there. Thus taking in NHLers will add to the cost for the team, even if the players do like last time and play for free, because they still need insurance.

Now the marginal players in Sweden's second tier league, that are on a try out contract and don't make the cut because of a NHLer joining the team, should probably give up on hockey and stick to their day job anyway (unless they're in the early twenties and still have some untapped potential).

Furthermore, hockey venues in Sweden are only occassionally sold out. Thus bringing in better players will bring in more money at the gates and is also likely to attract more sponsor money. Since there are no owners in Swedish hockey that pocket this money, any surplusses are likely to increase the funds available for player salaries... Thus adding a couple of NHLers to the team may actually increase future wages for the players riding the pine this season. Typically these players will also not really be riding the pine, they are more likely to be lent to a team in a lower division, while still getting paid from the team that owns them. Thus the players in the third tier leagues will face better opposition, develop their game and may one day earn a spot on an NHL roster thanks to the lockout players coming here and raising the overall level of play. :drink:

Now, a worker on strike who works elsewhere during the strike is imho a hypocrite.

But a worker who has been locked out by his employer - it's only common sense that they try to find something else to do until they are let back in.

There's a huge difference between being on strike and being locked out.
Kind of like the difference between mugging some one and being mugged.
In the former case you're the perpetrator, in the second you're the victim.


In this case it's a lock out, and I do not see anything wrong at all with a locked out player finding other employment till the conflict is resolved. Had it been a strike, it would be a completely different matter.

- - -

*Actually, "Svenska Hockeyligan" an organisation that all SEL teams are members of, has been sued for collusion, since all teams have agreed not to add any NHLers, which may be a breech of anti-trust laws. A court verdict is expected later today.
Last edited by Per on Fri Sep 21, 2012 5:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.

User avatar
Per
CC Legend
Posts: 3615
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Per » Fri Sep 21, 2012 4:58 am

Mondi wrote:... is a speaking ...
Btw, your Italian ancestry is showing. :wink:
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.

Post Reply