I think the union is waiting for the NLRB ruling. If the NLRB rules for them, they can have a judge issue an injunction and lift the lockout. Then it gets messy for the owners, because they have to go argue against the board.
If the union decertifies before the NLRB ruling, then the NLRB action ceases, since it was brought by the union, and the union would be no more.
So I think they're going to wait a couple weeks to see what the ruling is. If the NLRB rules against the players, I expect them to use the nuclear option.
Obviously, if the owners have a change of heart and want to sit down and actually negotiate while all this happens, then I'm sure the union would be happy to sit down and come to an agreement. I think certain owners are ready to cut a deal. The thing is to get enough votes away from the hardliners.
BTW, the 50/50 split wasn't necessarily off the table by the union. But in order for them to accept the 50/50 split, they would need concessions from the owners on the other 'system' issues.
The problem with decertification is it would take years to get through the courts if players actually sued for anti-trust damages. Not only that but it is no certainty that the players would even win such a case. Especially since the owners struck first with an NLRB complaint earlier this year alleging the players were not negotiating in good faith. The bottomline is it would take too long to get an outcome and the outcome may not necessarily be a good one for the players.
You're pretty dumb, Birn. You only see the surface. If the players DO de-certify, the league cannot do business while the case is being heard. As you said, that could take a couple of years. The owners may not mind dumping one season, but they will NOT put up with their doors being shut for multiple seasons. They would then have to actually negotiate in order to get the players to drop their suit.
The players don't have to win their suit, they just have to file it, and get all owners motions to dismiss denied. Once that happens, their could be a resolution in weeks.
It's going to take more than just a couple of weeks. That's just the first of several steps the players need to take to try and get the government to forcibly end the lockout. Even if the NLRB rules in favor of the players and the lockout is lifted, they still need to agree to a new CBA. Also, the owners would exercise their right to appeal the NLRB ruling.
For the players to win and force the NBA to reopen, the NLRB would have to issue a complaint against the owners, ruling that the league did engage in unfair labor practices. Then it would have to convince a federal court that, among other things, the players have been caused irreparable damage during the lockout.
At that point, the only remedy for the NBA would be to file an appeal, which it would have to lose. If all that happens, then the NBA would reopen, with free agency being conducted under the old system, along with the players getting back the old 57-43 split of revenue they enjoyed in the last collective bargaining agreement.
We would have a season this year but then we're right back in the same boat after the season. This time it is neither a lockout nor a strike.
NLRB ruling is the players last ditch effort since most of those appointees were placed by our socialist President Barack Hussein Obama. His appointees are all anti-business and pro-union corruption.
Bottomline is this is a long shot for the players since the NLRB has traditionally not been involved in sports disputes. Also, the NLRB has not issued a timetable by which they would decide whether or not to even file a complaint against the owners. By the time this all plays out, we would have lost most of the season.
NLRB is a federal agency (i.e. U.S. taxpayer funded) and should not hold adjudicatory power to settle disputes. USA taxpayers should not be funding the legal advocacy costs for millionaires, period. If the players have a dispute, they should pursue their remedy like everyone else in America - through the regular US court system.
As I've said all along...the players have little leverage to use. They need to just man up and accept the 50/50 deal and play basketball. It's a real shame how the NBAPA is doing such a dis-service to its members and basketball fans all over the world.
If they don't get the NLRB ruling
http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/s...nd-lockout-now
NLRB now holds key to NBA lockout
Surface bargaining. System changes. Draconian demands. Yep, it's the language of labor; and as far as we're concerned here in our Courtside Seat, that kind of lingo is a labor of love. Of course, we're talking about the 'L' word again: Lockout. We'll get to some juicy obstruction of justice and misdemeanor battery a little later; but today, we start with another capital letter. We start with …
The X Factor in the Lockout
In a flurry of acrimony and accusation, negotiations between NBA players and owners have collapsed. Even the assistance of a skilled mediator, George Cohen, did not draw the warring factions closer together, and might even have pushed them further apart. But there is still a ray of hope. A federal agency -- an unlikely agency, in that it doesn't have a long history of being effective in sports labor disputes -- has a chance now to make a difference as it is preparing a decision that could bring the lockout to a sudden end.
Officials of the National Labor Relations Board, sources say, appear to be ready to act on a players' union claim that NBA owners are guilty of unfair labor practices in their demands for "draconian demands and changes" and the declaration of a lockout when there was "no impasse in bargaining."
Click link to continue...
Is this the time frame for the NLRB, a couple weeks? It seems to be the best shot of ending this logger jam of a lockout and salvaging any chance of season.
I've been wanting to ask how decertifying would aid the union, but, knew I'd be ridiculed if I did, + I wouldn't get the answer, so this is swell.
Solid stuff, Chuck.
Cowardice move, Seppe.
But I'm glad to see you know your place on this side of town. Keep tiptoeing daisy.
^Please.
shhhh girl... adults talking here
Rumor is that it's coming any day now.
Or it could work like the NFL, where a judge will force them to negotiate or the judge himself will rule on what the agreement should be. Seeing that owners want to have a say on the agreement, they'll have to actually sit down and negotiate, instead of eating up whatever the judge might rule (which is what forced the hand on the NFL's owners case).
It's not a slam dunk for the union, but it looks like the route to follow if the NLRB doesn't give them a favorable ruling.
What I don't get is that the owners aren't dumb and they know the NLRB won't be favorable for them, so why drag this out like that? Just on the off chance they will get a ruling in their favor?
There's a few billions on the line here. I don't know that the NLRB is a sure thing for the players either. It's a government en y, and as such, it can be influenced.
The reality is that the owners are in no hurry to sit down and negotiate in union's terms until there's an actual risk of the lockout being lifted.
If the NLRB complaint doesn't stick and they decertify, Kessler will sue and request and immediate injunction that would be almost certainly be denied because of the appellate court from the last NFL case. They would then also appeal that to SCOTUS but who knows what their docket looks like.
It is very unlikely because of that precedent that a lower court would grant an injunction or if they did that an appellate court would not just shut it down. SCOTUS is the only recourse there.
If they de-certify, the NLRB route is closed to them immediately.
Sheridan reports that progress was made on several salary cap system issues before negotiations were suspended:
http://sheridanhoops.com/2011/10/23/...aining-issues/
We all knew they made some progress on some of the issues, but ultimately it doesn't really change where they are at overall unfortunately. Some really interesting concepts though...
No matter how the new CBA is structured, in the absence of a player of that caliber, there is virtually no shot at contending for a championship. A good team that "can get to the 2nd round or conference finals from time to time" isn't the same as competing for a championship.
ElNono, it'll end that way because the longer it goes, the more leverage the owners will have, because they can afford to hold out longer. If the union drop to the number the owners would accept (they claim 50, but that could be a negotiating ploy to get the union as close to 50 as possible), they'll probably be able to salvage a few more things they're seeking than they might at a later date.
The union can say that they've been more than fair on the amount of BRI they've conceded and they're right, but again, it's not about what's fair, it's about getting the best possible deal. 52.5 isn't getting a deal done. They'll have to go even lower and they might as well do it before they lose hundreds of millions more and contribute to doing damage to the league.
tbqh, I'm pretty sure the union is ready to take the 50/50 *IF* the owners are willing to soften the proposed hard cap a bit. See, Hunter et all didn't say they wouldn't take the 50/50, they said let's try to find some common ground on the system issues and then once we have that we'll talk about the 50/50. But that's when the owners said you take the 50/50 or we'll stop talking, and that's why we're here.
imo, the union is only holding on because of the NLRB decision, otherwise they would've decertified already. Don't forget that while Hunter/Fish might not want decertification, their hand can be forced by the players with a vote (or really, the agents behind the players).
The tactic for the union right now is to force the lockout lifted. They might not even need an actual order. Just to have the possibility of obtaining an order like that might be enough to have the owners sit down and drop the hard line.
Obviously, if they can't get close to that it's going to get ugly.
My 2c.
I agree completely The Nono, I'm still surprised the owners want to drag it out so much seeing as what we spoke about is the most likely outcome anyways (a ruling in favor of the players). Which if that is the case and they know that, it really is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
