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!

     

JR condescending to Peyton Manning during CBA meeting?

CatMan72

By CatMan72,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Happy Panther Grand Master

Happy Panther

Posted
Posted

9 more credit hours to my MBA and my Labor Relations and Collective Bargaining course goes into detail on how CBA negotiations should and should not be handled. Richardson should teach a course in what not to do during CBA negotiations. Collective bargaining is all about concessions. Richardson has made it clear that no concessions will be made and during his expletive laiden speach he made it clear the owners will take back the NFL. The fact is if the NFL is not careful, then they will be in violation of the Nation Labor Relations Act and the NLRB who was established by the US congress will find the NFL's actions during the labor negotiations to be in violation of their good faith bargaining obligation. Reasonalbe efforts demonstrated by both management and labor during labor negotiations, means both sides to meet, confer and make written offers. Both sides must show "reasonable" intent to set the terms of employment in a CBA. Richardson and the NFL will be found guilty of boulwarism "take it or leave it" bargaining tactics if they continue jamming the same CBA points down the players throats and lock them out because they refuse to sign a CBA with no concessions. Furthermore, the NFL will be guilty of surface bargaining, which is the act of simply going through the motions of negotiating without any real intention of arriving at an agreement. Boulwarism and surface bargaining are clearly being displayed by the NFL and Richardson. There is a list of things considered by the NLRB when considering unfair labor charges....I won't bore you any longer.....

Keep cheering monkeys...keep cheering.

great post

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted

I have a hard time beieving the NFL will be found guilty of surface bargaining because the NFLPA has not made much effort other than to squawk about wanting a deal. Their first proposal, when interpreted how they wanted, was just the status quo. There is also still plenty of time for real negotiations, and we have no idea if the owners have actually presented any compromises because by and large the only people talking are the players reps. It's the only action they have to take right now... if they don't get fans behind them they will be unable to get much out of the owners.

I wonder how decertification will play into this, if at all...

When the NFL met and the NFLPA presented a proposal, the NFLPA refused to admit it's proposal was indeed a proposal. Why? I suspect it is because the NFLPA screwed up on the money split and by accidentally suggesting a 50/50 split of football instead of total revenue they inadvertently caved to owners demands; since this was not their intent they had to say the proposal was just meant to illustrate a possible deal, not an actual proposal. (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6119630)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
forrest Newbie

forrest

Posted
Posted

A team earns its record at 14-2 or 2-14. a poisoned tongue chief executive does more harm than good. there were better ways to make his point with manning and everyone else. a flippant remark stings. JR would do well to transition business operations to a personality that is more unflappable in public. his lack of poise and lack of impulse control is disappointing. such a personality will have difficult in maintaining relationships...and this provides a glimpse of decline/fall of the franchise....anyone else think franchise needs a new owner?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

I have a hard time beieving the NFL will be found guilty of surface bargaining because the NFLPA has not made much effort other than to squawk about wanting a deal.

The NFL won't be guilty until one of two things happens. They force a lock out or they force their CBA through and make the players strike. If the owners do not make concessions and force their deal through, then they are indeed in violation. Richardson's speach to the owners back in March 2010 alone was one of the worst mistakes the owners could have made. Publicly stating that the owners are going to take back the NFL and force the players to sign the new CBA or a lock out will result, is a direct violation. Everything the NFL has done up to this point is surface bargaining. They have no intention of getting a deal done and Richardson wants this lock out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

A team earns its record at 14-2 or 2-14. a poisoned tongue chief executive does more harm than good. there were better ways to make his point with manning and everyone else. a flippant remark stings. JR would do well to transition business operations to a personality that is more unflappable in public. his lack of poise and lack of impulse control is disappointing. such a personality will have difficult in maintaining relationships...and this provides a glimpse of decline/fall of the franchise....anyone else think franchise needs a new owner?

Not necessarily new blood, but a new perspective. I don't think Richardson should sell, but pass it down. It's time for him to spend time with the grand babies and enjoy his last few years on this earth.

Richardson bought the team for $206 million in 1993 and the team's currently worth over $1 billion. I'd say he has done well and it's time to pass the legacy on to his boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
monstercat Newbie

monstercat

Posted
Posted

Why are so many judging JR on last year's record? Does anybody really believe he would be doing anything different right now if the Panthers had won 12 games and made it to the NFL championship game in 2010?

I'm guessing that he never expected the 2010 Panthers to go 2-14, even after releasing all of those veterans, anyway. It's not like any of us fans thought that releasing Delhomme, Moose and Hoover was going to ruin the offense, and I doubt JR did either. We were all worried about the defense, which actually played pretty well, given the circumstances. So none of you are being completely honest when you say that he tanked the season on purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

There is no reason for either side to make concessions right now.

All we are hearing is rhetoric and posturing.

When they do officially lockout is the time when real negotiations start.

Try not to get worked up over this stuff right now.

Once the NFL owners lockout the players they will be in violation of the NLRA as an unfair labor practice, because the owners invoked the lockout to prevent unionization and/or preclude collective bargaining before it begins, meaning surface bargaining took place and the owners didn't display "reasonable" intent to set the terms of employement during a CBA.

I don't know that the owners will lock out the players. They may try and force a strike, by placing a final offer on the table, but that could back fire too if the offer doesn't show "reasonable" intent, meaning some form of concessions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PantherBrew Newbie

PantherBrew

Posted
Posted

Once the NFL owners lockout the players they will be in violation of the NLRA as an unfair labor practice, because the owners invoked the lockout to prevent unionization and/or preclude collective bargaining before it begins, meaning surface bargaining took place and the owners didn't display "reasonable" intent to set the terms of employement during a CBA.

I don't know that the owners will lock out the players. They may try and force a strike, by placing a final offer on the table, but that could back fire too if the offer doesn't show "reasonable" intent, meaning some form of concessions.

I am sure the Owners are smart enough to display a hint of "reasonableness" to avoid the violation.

These guys are not idiots.

No offense, but if you know this, I am sure them and their legal advisers know this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
riddel Newbie

riddel

Posted
Posted

Why are so many judging JR on last year's record? Does anybody really believe he would be doing anything different right now if the Panthers had won 12 games and made it to the NFL championship game in 2010?

I'm guessing that he never expected the 2010 Panthers to go 2-14, even after releasing all of those veterans, anyway. It's not like any of us fans thought that releasing Delhomme, Moose and Hoover was going to ruin the offense, and I doubt JR did either. We were all worried about the defense, which actually played pretty well, given the circumstances. So none of you are being completely honest when you say that he tanked the season on purpose.

You're the biggest monkey of them all.

Richardson didn't care one way or the other whether the Panthers won. He was more concerned about the CBA. He sold off all his debt and prepared for the lockout. He left a lame duck coach who's contract was expiring in charge and let him fall on the sword. Richardson knew EXACTLY what he was doing. He wanted to show the NFL that you don't have to spend to win.....well how did that work out for you Richardson?

Losing 8 starters and not replacing them with comparable would kill ANY NFL team. Saying the defense did well, during a 2-14 season where they spent the majority of the game on the field, is about the stupidest thing I've heard yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...