Labor Dispute Master Thread (1 Viewer)

[VTjkru]

For someone who is less ignorant than I; on what grounds could the retired players even win a lawsuit? If both the owners and the players wanted to be huge pricks they could just exclude them altogether right?

 

[jbobbett]

I was listening to NFL radio on the way to work this morning and Joe DeLamielleure was on. It sounds like the retired group will be filing another lawsuit today. They are unhappy with what they are getting. Basically, he was saying that under the proposed new deal, each player would be receiving $1000 more per month, i.e., if they were making $275, they now would get $1275. Apparently, they think they deserve more. When asked by Ross Tucker what would make them happy, he said they would be asking for 2.5% of the gross, half from the NFLPA and half from the owners. His main beef was with the NFLPA. He seemed to think the owners would be willing.

I would like to see what that suit is based on. Was some previous contract breached? "Deserving more" doesn't seem like a strong legal argument.

 

[jbobbett]

For someone who is less ignorant than I; on what grounds could the retired players even win a lawsuit? If both the owners and the players wanted to be huge pricks they could just exclude them altogether right?

Yeah, on the surface it looks like that to me. No one cares if retired players strike. Do they have anything more than the moral/nostalgia angle to press here?

 

[renesauz]

Not sure what angle they have at all. They're already getting more than they had negotiated in their deals when they played, and FAR MORE than any retirement plan they paid in to.

 

[Ksquared]

Joe commented that the Union had told the pre93 guys to take their pension at 45 and then they will be taken care of as the get older. They feel they are not getting taken care of as the cost of living goes up and their pensions are not. Second issue was the Union did not let them know when they took that early pension, they lost their disability coverage & insurance (for those that had them).

As I stated a page ago and some of the anti-NFL/owner people refuse to not bow at D Smith's feet, but Joe D was clearly (and stated so) that D Smith is the villian and is just trying to look good to the public in the last minute of the process. But I don't believe the retirees are being realistic in their 2.5% of gross.

Joe D also stated the retirees are irate with the bait and switch the NFLPA did to the retirees with the EA sports contract. Telling them they would get X and instead get almost nothing from the use of their likeness. Alot of bitterness towards the Union not representing the retirees, just the current players. Which unfortunately is the way the Union is set up right now. They represent the retirees when it comes to legacy of the game, but the retirees have no real voice or power.

 

[cheese]

Can someone dumb down the salary cap/floor dynamic for me?

Lets just throw out simple numbers to make it easier for me. Lets say the cash floor is 90M and the salary cap is 100M. Doesn't this mean you cannot take >10M in cap hits for a year for players you aren't paying? Won't this severly limit who is a candidate to be cut? What if you already have a bunch of cap hits coming in 2011?

I have a feeling I'm missing something.

 

[Hoosier16]

I was listening to NFL radio on the way to work this morning and Joe DeLamielleure was on. It sounds like the retired group will be filing another lawsuit today. They are unhappy with what they are getting. Basically, he was saying that under the proposed new deal, each player would be receiving $1000 more per month, i.e., if they were making $275, they now would get $1275. Apparently, they think they deserve more. When asked by Ross Tucker what would make them happy, he said they would be asking for 2.5% of the gross, half from the NFLPA and half from the owners. His main beef was with the NFLPA. He seemed to think the owners would be willing.

Fair or not, I think the retired players have no place at the table at this point. They may need to take their own legal recourse (which they appear to be doing) and try to get something agreed to after the 10-year CBA is put into place by ownership and the NFLPA.

He readily admitted they likely had no legal right. He basically said they were trying to use public pressure to get it done.

 

[Jason Wood]

Can someone dumb down the salary cap/floor dynamic for me?Lets just throw out simple numbers to make it easier for me. Lets say the cash floor is 90M and the salary cap is 100M. Doesn't this mean you cannot take >10M in cap hits for a year for players you aren't paying? Won't this severly limit who is a candidate to be cut? What if you already have a bunch of cap hits coming in 2011?I have a feeling I'm missing something.

That's part of it, yes.The cash floor is really annual cash flow devoted to players. In other words, teams have to be paying out $90 million (in your example) to players. Now they can be players that are no longer on the team, but you have to cut checks worth $90mm toward current and past players at a minimum. Lots of teams will likely need to outlay sizable bonuses this next few weeks to get up to that minimum, but teams that have a lot of dead money (not in terms of cap pro ration but in terms of money actually owed out), would be in a different situation.

 

[Catbird]

I was listening to NFL radio on the way to work this morning and Joe DeLamielleure was on. It sounds like the retired group will be filing another lawsuit today. They are unhappy with what they are getting. Basically, he was saying that under the proposed new deal, each player would be receiving $1000 more per month, i.e., if they were making $275, they now would get $1275. Apparently, they think they deserve more. When asked by Ross Tucker what would make them happy, he said they would be asking for 2.5% of the gross, half from the NFLPA and half from the owners. His main beef was with the NFLPA. He seemed to think the owners would be willing.

I would like to see what that suit is based on. Was some previous contract breached? "Deserving more" doesn't seem like a strong legal argument.

I imagine the owners would be quite willing at 2.5% if they could settle the retired players concussion claims into the package.

 

[Sidewinder16]

Schefter tweet:

John Clayton reports that NFL owners have been told by league to be prepared to vote on new CBA between 3:30 p.m. and 5:30 p.m.

ETA: Jason LaCanfora also tweeted this:

On the issue of NFLPA recertification, people I speak to believe that could be done in a matter of hours, not days. Shouldn't be big delay

 

[zadok]

The last 2 items on PFT confirm that Jeffrey Kessler is the stone cold villain in this whole "drama"...

 

[JHuber77]

The last 2 items on PFT confirm that Jeffrey Kessler is the stone cold villain in this whole "drama"...

What makes you think that? The fact that he has personally almost derailed this process a number of times or the fact that he always just looks like he just got done pumping the neighbors cat? When this is finally done, the NBA players association should tell Kessler to go pound sand.

 

[FTRWRTR]

Players don't sign. If the Owners sign and players don't everyone should see who is to blame if there is no football or delayed football.

Right, it had nothing to do with the owners locking the players out, and not starting seriously negotiating until a few weeks ago when the players didn't "fold" like the NFL lawyers promised they would.

Not to mention there were still four years left on the current CBA

 

[FTRWRTR]

Can someone dumb down the salary cap/floor dynamic for me?Lets just throw out simple numbers to make it easier for me. Lets say the cash floor is 90M and the salary cap is 100M. Doesn't this mean you cannot take >10M in cap hits for a year for players you aren't paying? Won't this severly limit who is a candidate to be cut? What if you already have a bunch of cap hits coming in 2011?I have a feeling I'm missing something.

That's part of it, yes.The cash floor is really annual cash flow devoted to players. In other words, teams have to be paying out $90 million (in your example) to players. Now they can be players that are no longer on the team, but you have to cut checks worth $90mm toward current and past players at a minimum. Lots of teams will likely need to outlay sizable bonuses this next few weeks to get up to that minimum, but teams that have a lot of dead money (not in terms of cap pro ration but in terms of money actually owed out), would be in a different situation.

On a related note:Cap situations* TeamStatus Arizona $37.3 million under Atlanta $13.9 million under Baltimore $5.33 million under Buffalo $35.9 million under Carolina $30.6 million under Chicago $37. million under Cincinnati $35.9 million under Cleveland $33.3 million under Dallas $18.9 million over Denver $1 million under Detroit $16.6 million under Green Bay $62,600 under Houston $7.6 million under Indianapolis $2.7 million over Jacksonville $31.4 million under Kansas City $34.3 million under Miami $13.6 million under Minnesota $5.1 million over New England $7.57 million under New Orleans $11.7 million under N.Y. Giants $11.3 million over N.Y. Jets $1.2 million over Oakland $10 million over Philadelphia $13 million under Pittsburgh $10 million over San Diego $19.4 million under San Francisco $18.9 million under Seattle $39 million under St. Louis $35.6 million under Tampa Bay $59.2 million under Tennessee $10.3 million under Washington$10.6 million under

 

[Cripster]

Owners are not going to sign a deal that does not include re-certification of NFLPA IMHO.

 

[mrip541]

Rotoworld posted a news update saying the owners had the votes to pass the new deal. A few minutes later they took it down.

 

[cobalt_27]

For someone who is less ignorant than I; on what grounds could the retired players even win a lawsuit? If both the owners and the players wanted to be huge pricks they could just exclude them altogether right?

Yeah, on the surface it looks like that to me. No one cares if retired players strike. Do they have anything more than the moral/nostalgia angle to press here?

There's no legal leg to stand on. It's more an appeal to a feeling of moral obligation the pre-93ers feel the current players should have toward them for shouldering the load that paved the way to all this financial success.It's a helluva shame that the current players aren't willing to take care of their own. There's no legal obligation, but it sure is sad that guys like Vincent Jackson should "get his" (as wcrob said in this thread earlier), but shouldn't feel compelled to lift a finger to support the retirees.

 

[GregR_2]

Owners are not going to sign a deal that does not include re-certification of NFLPA IMHO.

I don't think that's really an issue. One of the resident lawyers can correct me if I'm wrong... but I don't think the law allows for a CBA unless the employees involved are represented by a union. So it's a legal requirement they re-certify before anyone on either side can sign.ETA: Ok, to be more exact... I don't think there can be a 'deal' unless they are a union. The league could end the lockout and proceed with things by the terms in the deal, but they would be doing so without the protection of labor law and they would be as exposed to antitrust lawsuits as if they just imposed whatever system they wanted without player agreement.

 

[Grahamburn]

Tampa Bay

$59.2 million under

:confetti:

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

from an ABC affiliate out of Green Bay:

blah blah blahSources close to the negotiations say the group plans to vote on the deal by 4:30 P.M., Central time.blah blah blahA conference call among players, their executive committee, and player representatives is scheduled for 7 P.M.They'll reportedly discuss whether to accept a settlement approved by the owners and how to start the voting process.

so close...

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

The last 2 items on PFT confirm that Jeffrey Kessler is the stone cold villain in this whole "drama"...

The idea that he's a rogue agent in this is pretty funny. He's playing exactly the role he's been asked to.

 

[Premier]

Tampa Bay$59.2 million under:confetti:

 

[Faust]

Potential recertification of union clouding timeline for deal

The dominant question at the NFL owners meetings in Atlanta is: When will the owners lift the lockout if each side approves a negotiated settlement of the antitrust and TV lawsuits today?

It's a simple question with a potentially complex answer.

As part of a deal to open its doors, the league wants the Players Association to agree to recertify as a union. However even if the players agree in principle to do so, it's unclear how long it would take to complete the process. The 32 player representatives discussed the matter of recertification but did not vote on it Wednesday in Washington.

Sources say the league believes it could be done in the relative blink of an eye. However the players might want a longer, more formal process after NFL attorneys argued that decertification of the Players Association in March was a sham.

There is concern among some players that if they recertify too quickly, it would support the league's claims and might be used against them the next time the sides are stuck in a similar situation during collective bargaining negotiations.

Beyond that, some players believe they're better off as a professional trade association because that would allow them to maintain their antitrust rights and sue the league -- as individuals or a class -- over things like restraint of trade or suppression of wages.

On the other side of the table, NFL officials wants the players to recertify not only because it would take the antitrust issue out of the equation, but also because it would give them the authority to collectively bargain uniform working conditions for each team. Without a players union, individual clubs would establish their own policies and guidelines for things like player discipline and drug testing.

"I certainly remember comments from some of the owners about how we might not even be like a real union. Well, guess what? The decision to decertify was important, because at the time we were a real union," DeMaurice Smith said outside NFLPA headquarters in Washington. "And the decision for our players, as men, to come back as a union is going to be an equally serious and very sober one that they have to make."

The NFL declined comment about whether it would be a deal-breaker if the players refused to recertify as a union. The expectation is that the players will do so. But when? That answer ultimately could determine how quickly the owners lift the lockout.

 

[GregR_2]

NFL owners have ratified the agreement, per ESPN

 

[cobalt_27]

The last 2 items on PFT confirm that Jeffrey Kessler is the stone cold villain in this whole "drama"...

The idea that he's a rogue agent in this is pretty funny. He's playing exactly the role he's been asked to.

I just hope that you're not too unhappy that the players are going to agree to a deal here and that we'll have football this season. I mean, how disappointing it must be for you that they settled and didn't rock the boat to your liking.Awesome to see that smart people prevailed here, got a deal done, and we're back to having football.

 

[Cripster]

NFL owners have ratified the agreement, per ESPN

Thats the easy part.

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

NFL owners have ratified the agreement, per ESPN

Per Rich Eisen 31-0 vote from the owners. Football operations meeting set for 8am tomorrow.

 

[Cripster]

What will the players do? Will they re-certify? Do they have to re-certify under the owner approved CBA?

 

[cobalt_27]

What will the players do? Will they re-certify? Do they have to re-certify under the owner approved CBA?

The players will discuss tonight, possibly vote on the antitrust suit and then vote to recertify. Once that's settled, the owners can/will lift the lockout.Then they all sign the new CBA, and we're back in business. Should take no more than 10 minutes. But, I think the players want to make this decertification/recertification business seem legit, so they'll probably drag their heels while "deliberating" on this very serious decision. Let's turn the page, already.

 

[GregR_2]

What will the players do? Will they re-certify? Do they have to re-certify under the owner approved CBA?

My understanding is if the players do not re-certify, it isn't a CBA. It's not much different than if the owners just imposed those terms on the players on their own, and the players could sue them under antitrust labor laws.The players may not want to re-certify right away because if they do, it could be used against them the next time they de-certify that it is a sham (which is what was argued this time). But the owners are exposed if they lift the lockout without them re-certifying into a union. The players are saying essentially, "trust us and start the season and we'll re-certify later". Whether the owners give in or not who knows. I don't see why they would.

 

[The Kerminator]

NFL owners have ratified the agreement, per ESPN

Per Rich Eisen 31-0 vote from the owners. Football operations meeting set for 8am tomorrow.

Did somebody forget to wake Al Davis?

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

NFL owners have ratified the agreement, per ESPN

Per Rich Eisen 31-0 vote from the owners. Football operations meeting set for 8am tomorrow.

Did somebody forget to wake Al Davis?

Funny you mention that, correction via twitter from Albert Breer,

The one team abstaining, according to @richeisen, was the Oakland Raiders.

ETA

Cowboys owner Jerry Jones just told me the owners also approved a new revenue sharing plan.

 

[JbizzleMan]

 

[Fire the Fat Man]

Don't get your hopes up, players still have to pass AND re-certify the union by next Wednesday

 

[Hoosier16]

On NFL network now. Facilities tentatively open Saturday, FA to begin Wednesday.

 

[The Kerminator]

NFL's proposed schedule forthereturn of football

Here's the NFL's proposed schedule for return of football

By Tom Silverstein of the Journal Sentinel

July 21, 2011 6:25 p.m. |(2) Comments

JULY

July 23 Voluntary training, conditioning and classroom instruction permitted until first day of clubs’ preseason training camps.

July 23 Pre-2011 League Year Period commences. 2011 Free Agency List to be issued and will become effective on the first day of the 2011 League Year (July 27). Clubs/players may begin to renegotiate contracts. Clubs may begin to sign Drafted Rookies and their own UFAs, RFAs, Exclusive Rights Players and Franchise Players.

July 23 Waivers begin for the 2011 League Year.

July 23 Starting at 2:00 PM ET, clubs may negotiate with, but not sign, Undrafted Rookie Free Agents, free agents, and other clubs’ UFAs, RFAs, and Franchise Players.

July 24 Starting at 2:00 PM ET, clubs may begin to sign undrafted rookie free agents.

July 27 2011 League Year commences at 2:00 PM ET, provided NFLPA has ratified CBA. Free Agency Signing Period begins. Clubs may sign free agents and other clubs’ Unrestricted Free Agents. Clubs may sign Offer Sheets. Trading period begins. All Clubs must be under the Salary Cap. Top 51 rule applies.

July 27 Expand rosters to 90-man limit.

July 27 Training Camps open for all clubs, provided NFLPA has ratified CBA. Day One activities limited to physicals, meetings, and conditioning. No pads permitted on Day Two or Day Three.

AUGUST

August 9 Deadline for players under contract to report to their clubs to earn an Accrued Season for free agency.

August 11-15 First Preseason Weekend

August 12 Deadline for signing of Offer Sheets by Restricted Free Agents.

(17-day period concludes)

August 12 Deadline for June 1 Tender to Unrestricted Free Agents. If the player has not signed a Player Contract with a Club by August 26, he may negotiate or sign a Player Contract from August 26 until the Tuesday following the tenth week of the regular season, at 4:00 PM ET, only with his Prior Club.

August 12 Deadline: if a Drafted Rookie has not signed a Player Contract by this date, he cannot be traded during his initial League Year and may sign a Player Contract only with the drafting Club until the day of the Draft in the next League Year.

August 13-17 Each Club has until five days prior to its second preseason game to provide any tendered but unsigned Exclusive Rights Player or Restricted Free Agent with written notice of the Club’s intent to place the player on the Exempt List if the player fails to report at least the day before the Club’s second preseason game.

August 16 Deadline for Prior Club to exercise Right of First Refusal to Restricted Free Agents.

(Four-day matching period conlcudes)

August 17 Deadline for June 1 Tender to Restricted Free Agents who have received a Qualifying Offer for a Right of First Refusal Only.

August 18-22 Second Preseason Weekend.

August 25-28 Third Preseason Weekend.

August 26 Signing Period ends for Unrestricted Free Agents who received the June 1 Tender.

August 29 Deadline for June 15 Tender to Restricted Free Agents. If player’s Qualifying Offer is greater than 110% of the player’s prior year’s Paragraph 5 Salary (with all other terms of his prior year contract carried forward unchanged), the Club may withdraw the Qualifying Offer on August 29 and retain its exclusive negotiating rights to the player, so long as the Club immediately tenders the player a one-year Player Contract of at least 110% of his prior year’s Paragraph 5 Salary, with all the terms of his prior year’s contract carried forward unchanged.

August 30 Clubs reduce rosters from 90 players to 75 players.

SEPTEMBER

September 1-2 Fourth Preseason Weekend.

September 3 Clubs reduce rosters to 53 players.

September 8-12 First Regular-Season Weekend.

September 18-19 Second Regular-Season Weekend

September 20 Deadline at 4:00 PM ET for any Club that designated a Franchise Player to sign such player to a multi-year contract or extension.

 

[cobalt_27]

Don't get your hopes up, players still have to pass AND re-certify the union by next Wednesday

It'll happen by then. They'll drag their heels, but they'll eventually sign off on it and get to work.

 

[TLEF316]

Al Davis as the abstention is awesome.

 

[VaCatFan]

NFL owners have ratified the agreement, per ESPN

Per Rich Eisen 31-0 vote from the owners. Football operations meeting set for 8am tomorrow.

Did somebody forget to wake Al Davis?

Wake him? Did anyone check his pulse? Man has been dead for years. I think Jeff Dunham has his hand in him somewhere making his lips move and is playing us all for fools.

 

[Cripster]

What will the players do? Will they re-certify? Do they have to re-certify under the owner approved CBA?

My understanding is if the players do not re-certify, it isn't a CBA. It's not much different than if the owners just imposed those terms on the players on their own, and the players could sue them under antitrust labor laws.The players may not want to re-certify right away because if they do, it could be used against them the next time they de-certify that it is a sham (which is what was argued this time). But the owners are exposed if they lift the lockout without them re-certifying into a union. The players are saying essentially, "trust us and start the season and we'll re-certify later". Whether the owners give in or not who knows. I don't see why they would.

Didn't the 8th circuit pretty much ignore their decertification in upholding lockout.

 

[ceo3west]

The owners just agreed to their own proposal, this thing is far from done.

 

[Young 8]

DeMaurice Smith: Players did not agree to terms passed by owners

 

[Bigboy10182000]

The owners are genius.

 

[PRAE]

 

[Fire the Fat Man]

Don't get your hopes up, players still have to pass AND re-certify the union by next Wednesday

It'll happen by then. They'll drag their heels, but they'll eventually sign off on it and get to work.

Take a look at De Smith's letter. This is not being settled before Wednesday.

 

[Young 8]

Jim Trotter of SI.com and ESPN’s Chris Mortensen have obtained a copy of the e-mail sent by NFLPA* executive director DeMaurice Smith to the board of player representatives.

Here’s the full text, as Trotter posted on Twitter, with edits to make it more easily readable.

“As you know the Owners have ratified their proposal to settle our differences,” the e-mail states. “It is my understanding they are forwarding it to us. As you may have heard, they apparently approved a supplemental revenue sharing proposal. Obviously, we have not been a part of those discussions. As you know from yesterday, issues that need to be collectively bargained remain open other issues such as workers compensation, economic issues and end of deal terms remain unresolved. There is no agreement between the NFL and the Players at this time. I look forward to our call tonight.”

 

[cobalt_27]

Don't get your hopes up, players still have to pass AND re-certify the union by next Wednesday

It'll happen by then. They'll drag their heels, but they'll eventually sign off on it and get to work.

Take a look at De Smith's letter. This is not being settled before Wednesday.

Yeah, I suppose if they want to be big dooshes about this, it's been part of their m.o. this entire offseason. I still maintain they'll get their heads out of their asses by then.

 

[zadok]

Of course there is no deal until the players agree to it. It is obvious De Smith agreed to the terms the owners just approved but he can't speak for the players en masse...

 

[Multiple Scores]

DeMaurice Smith: Players did not agree to terms passed by owners

Internet sites must be very slow. Both espn and NFL websites say players yet to vote.

 

[thayman]

The owners are genius.