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!

     

Owners leave CBA talks to have meeting

Highlandfire

By Highlandfire,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Happy Panther Grand Master

Happy Panther

Posted
Posted

Jerry Richardson was seen on the way and was quoted as saying:

"Now y'all look here. Where's my gawddanged biscuit? Ima go look at some tittays! RAWR!! We gotta take this league back. Look at this here pie chart RAWR!! Do you even know how to read a pie chart, SON?? TITTAYS RAWR!!!!!"

(paraphrased)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Saltman Apprentice

The Saltman

Posted
Posted

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81e91644/article/owners-meeting-to-discuss-their-next-step-in-labor-situation

A league source indicated that, in all likelihood, whatever business takes place -- a decision to lock out players, an extension of the labor negotiating window, a possible union motion to decertify -- will do so Wednesday. Some owners could depart the D.C. area as soon as Wednesday night.

Members of the league's labor committee were in Washington in the morning to participate in labor mediation for the first time, but they will head to this meeting afterward.

Following their session, the owners and team officials will communicate with union officials about their intentions, according to league sources. They have been receiving updates on the mediation efforts while in their meeting

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Highlandfire Newbie

Highlandfire

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yeah it's gonna be the players filing antitrust suits and lose. The Union will be bust, the NFL will appeal all that doty rules as he has leaned toward players to the point the NFL has a valid complaint he is biased. The appellate courts will end up ruling in the NFL's favor etc.

The owners are gonna win this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zod Grand Master

Zod

Posted
Posted

There may be football though if they do settle in the courts. By locking the players out, they could argue that the owners are preventing them from joining a union which is against the law.

So basically there could be football, but policies may change throughout the year through the court system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
panthers55 Grand Master

panthers55

Posted
Posted

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=munson/110302

THis article suggests that the union will decertify today, the owners will lockout tomorrow and the case will go before Dody in a few days as an antitrust case.

There are two reasons. First, if the union does not decertify now, before the current bargaining agreement expires, it cannot decertify for six months, according to a clause in the CBA. There is no reason for the players to wait until September to use their best weapons. (We'll get to exactly what those weapons are in a moment.) So far, it appears that bargaining as a union has accomplished nothing.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, by decertifying now, before the expiration of the CBA, the players are trying to stay in the Minneapolis courtroom of U.S. District Judge David Doty, who over the years has issued several rulings that were unfavorable to the owners. That includes a ruling late Tuesday concerning the NFL's television network contracts. (More about that later, too.) Doty, 82, an ex-Marine who was appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan in 1987, has presided over disputes between the players and the owners since the early '90s. Under his guidance, the players and the owners made the deal that is now expiring, a deal in which both sides prospered at levels beyond expectation. But Doty's jurisdiction over the NFL's labor case expires with the current agreement, meaning Thursday night. If the players wait and decertify later, they would have no chance of staying in Doty's courtroom and would have to take their chances before another judge. But if they decertify before midnight Thursday and then immediately file antitrust litigation, that litigation automatically goes to Doty, who will maintain control of it until its conclusion even if the CBA is no longer in effect.

Will these weapons -- the lawsuit and the injunction -- work? Will they solve the problem and save the 2011 season?

Decertification and antitrust litigation probably have a better chance of producing an agreement than the current negotiations and mediation do. There is little doubt that the players will win at a trial of their antitrust lawsuit against the owners. But a trial is months, or even a year, away. There is, however, considerable doubt that the players will be able to obtain an injunction, a court order that would require the owners to end their lockout. An injunction is the most drastic action that any judge can take. Injunctions are issued only in emergencies when there is no alternative. The owners and their lawyers will argue that there is no emergency, that there is no reason for a court order on a lockout, and that the court should slow down and wait for a trial. The players and their lead attorney, Jeff Kessler, will face a serious challenge in persuading a judge that they are entitled to an injunction. It could happen, but it is not likely.

But the request for the injunction will bring players and owners into the courthouse and could then lead to negotiations and a settlement. Facing the possibility of an injunction, the owners might be forced to make an offer that the players can accept. The CBA that has governed the league for 18 years was the result of courthouse conferences with the judge helping in the negotiations.

Whew! OK, what's the best guess at what will happen next?

Within a few days, the players will try to bring the owners before Doty and ask for the injunction that will stop the lockout. It could happen within a day or two. Although that injunction will be the specific issue of the day, remember that Doty is also considering the separate case in which the players are attacking television contracts that include lockout clauses requiring the league's network partners to pay the NFL even when there are no games. They're also asking Doty for an injunction in the TV case, a court order that would prevent the networks from paying $4 billion to the NFL for games that are not played.

With both cases in his courtroom, Doty would be in a position to use his decisions as a wedge to bring the players and the owners into settlement discussions. Will he grant one or both of the injunctions? The uncertainty over his decisions is the kind of thing that frequently leads to productive settlement conferences. In subtle but unmistakable ways, Doty will try to lead the opposing sides to a settlement. It could work. But if there is no settlement, it is difficult to imagine that Doty would give the players two injunctions in a single dispute. One injunction is unusual. Two are unlikely. My guess is that he will issue the injunction that bars network payments to the league for games not played, and will then encourage additional settlement discussions

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...