The Official S2 NBA Lockout Thread! (2 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Just wouldn't mind finding out what all this means. Kind of an outline on what we should expect.
 
BrianFromWA said:
What recourse is there for a player to say "eff you, Hunter and Kessler--you don't represent me!" Is that the decertify process? And they need 130 signatures to vote on that?

And if, for some reason, K*be can get 226 players together, can they accept the owners' offer on their behalf?
Click to expand...

No. However, those players can all sign contracts with NBA teams starting a couple of hours ago. In theory, the owners can sign anyplayers they want right now, and players have the right to sign on their own behalf, since there is no union
 
HCP said:
Just wouldn't mind finding out what all this means. Kind of an outline on what we should expect.
Click to expand...

The outline, as explained to me, is this.

Both sides can now negotiate a new framework of a CBA

Players will sue owners. We will likely see true financial statements, and the players will argue over fixed salary systems and such

The owners will argue against the "monopoly" argument saying that players can play in any league they want anywhere in the world

The league has already filed complaints in with the Labor Board regarding the unions tactic of disclaiming interest. They did this months ago.

If it makes the courts, this could take years. Most likely thing to happen is renegotiating starts and something is settled around Jan.

My brother in law said he would be shocked if the players win in court. "A 1 in a million shot" is what he says
 
Mediocre Man said:
He advises me on stuff regarding the lockout. I can pass it along as he does it, or relay messages on to him
Click to expand...
Get that lazy SOB to log in and answer all our questions! I'm sure Denny can afford to pay him. :)
 
Mediocre Man said:
No. However, those players can all sign contracts with NBA teams starting a couple of hours ago. In theory, the owners can sign anyplayers they want right now, and players have the right to sign on their own behalf, since there is no union
Click to expand...

Holy Shit! This is gonna get nuts! Wild wild west style!
 
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/33289/union-makes-big-move-without-polling-members

I was asking what I thought was a fairly boring question. I would have been satisfied with a response about by-laws or somesuch. But Wasserman and Kessler blew up. I couldn't even finish the question before both were loud, gruff and dismissive.

The gist of the response was that you cannot give your adversary direct access to the membership. "That's not how any union in America, that I'm aware of, operates," said Kessler. If the NBA is just going to send offers straight to the players, why even have a union? The idea is that the union is savvier, and knows a good deal when it sees one. And only when the union is sure that the deal is in players' best interests will they present it to the workers.
Click to expand...

How savvy of you kessler.
 
Mediocre Man said:
The outline, as explained to me, is this.

Both sides can now negotiate a new framework of a CBA

Players will sue owners. We will likely see true financial statements, and the players will argue over fixed salary systems and such

The owners will argue against the "monopoly" argument saying that players can play in any league they want anywhere in the world

The league has already filed complaints in with the Labor Board regarding the unions tactic of disclaiming interest. They did this months ago.

If it makes the courts, this could take years. Most likely thing to happen is renegotiating starts and something is settled around Jan.

My brother in law said he would be shocked if the players win in court. "A 1 in a million shot" is what he says
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info...... MM, it's not that I don't trust you, but remember "Deal Coming Soon"? Your brother needs to sign up and be our Law-Guru!
 
HCP said:
Thanks for the info...... MM, it's not that I don't trust you, but remember "Deal Coming Soon"? Your brother needs to sign up and be our Law-Guru!
Click to expand...

No worries. Get you info elsewhere if you'd rather. I am sure others can and will offer just as good if not better input. If anyone has a question they'd like answered, PM me and I will try to find an answer for you.

Good luck on the job front, John. Hopefully this gets worked out soon so your stress level can be kept to a minimum.
 
Mediocre Man said:
No worries. Get you info elsewhere if you'd rather. I am sure others can and will offer just as good if not better input. If anyone has a question they'd like answered, PM me and I will try to find an answer for you.

Good luck on the job front, John. Hopefully this gets worked out soon so your stress level can be kept to a minimum.
Click to expand...

You know I'm joking with you brother! Thanks for the info, keep it coming!
 
Mediocre Man said:
No worries. Get you info elsewhere if you'd rather. I am sure others can and will offer just as good if not better input. If anyone has a question they'd like answered, PM me and I will try to find an answer for you.

Good luck on the job front, John. Hopefully this gets worked out soon so your stress level can be kept to a minimum.
Click to expand...

November 1st???????
 
Mediocre Man said:
The outline, as explained to me, is this.

Both sides can now negotiate a new framework of a CBA

Players will sue owners. We will likely see true financial statements, and the players will argue over fixed salary systems and such

The owners will argue against the "monopoly" argument saying that players can play in any league they want anywhere in the world

The league has already filed complaints in with the Labor Board regarding the unions tactic of disclaiming interest. They did this months ago.

If it makes the courts, this could take years. Most likely thing to happen is renegotiating starts and something is settled around Jan.

My brother in law said he would be shocked if the players win in court. "A 1 in a million shot" is what he says
Click to expand...

So, basically what I've been posting. I'm not even a lawyer!
 
Fucking Nuts, if they the players wanted to de-cert they should have done this in July! What did they think the owners would do, start playing soft ball?

:shakeshead:
 
All I ask is when a poster claims to have "insider information" is to be right at least like once a year.

When it never comes to fruition I have no choice but to give that poster shit.
 
RoyToy.... my insider says you haven't had sex with another human in years!
 
Could they league go back old school style with like 12 teams?
 
^Haha! That comeback actually made me laugh. Well typed.
 
Wish I had paid attention better in my business classes.
 
HailBlazers said:
Fucking Nuts, if they the players wanted to de-cert they should have done this in July! What did they think the owners would do, start playing soft ball?

:shakeshead:
Click to expand...

The players needed to jump through some hoops to demonstrate that they were bargaining in good faith. One argument that owners made in the NFL situation (and that the NBA will likely make) is that the players didn't really want to negotiate because they knew they could decertify and take the owners to court.

The players now can point to the concessions that they made over the course of the bargaining and say, "Look... we did our best!". And (even though I don't have a ton of sympathy for the players' position) I think that they're right.

If they had done that in July, the owners presumably would have had a much easier time of winning the legal proceedings earlier, cutting the threat/option of decertification off at the pass and being able to shove their deal down the players' throats.

It might be that the league and players are worse off, in the long run, for their maneuverings, but I think that going through collective bargaining in good faith before decertifying increases the chances that they will succeed in court... or at least in the lower courts.

Ed O.
 
RoyToy said:
All I ask is when a poster claims to have "insider information" is to be right at least like once a year.

When it never comes to fruition I have no choice but to give that poster shit.
Click to expand...

I have been right many times. You choose to overlook those posts and only focus on the ones that don't end up happening for whatever reason.

Dave Checketts works as a consultant for the damn Detroit Pistons, and he thought the lockout was over a few days ago. Shit happens.
 
Ed O said:
The players needed to jump through some hoops to demonstrate that they were bargaining in good faith. One argument that owners made in the NFL situation (and that the NBA will likely make) is that the players didn't really want to negotiate because they knew they could decertify and take the owners to court.

The players now can point to the concessions that they made over the course of the bargaining and say, "Look... we did our best!". And (even though I don't have a ton of sympathy for the players' position) I think that they're right.

If they had done that in July, the owners presumably would have had a much easier time of winning the legal proceedings earlier, cutting the threat/option of decertification off at the pass and being able to shove their deal down the players' throats.

It might be that the league and players are worse off, in the long run, for their maneuverings, but I think that going through collective bargaining in good faith before decertifying increases the chances that they will succeed in court... or at least in the lower courts.

Ed O.
Click to expand...



I think the issue here though is that the owners can also show they were bargaining in good faith.....right?


Also, the league filed suit in courts months ago after Kessler said they would decertify.

"At a bargaining session in February 2010, Jeffrey Kessler, counsel for the union, threatened that the players would abandon the collective bargaining process and start an antitrust lawsuit against our teams if they did not get a bargaining resolution that was acceptable to them.
"In anticipation of this day, the NBA filed an unfair labor practice charge before the National Labor Relations Board asserting that, by virtue of its continued threats, the union was not bargaining in good faith. We also began a litigation in federal court in anticipation of this same bargaining tactic.
"The NBA has negotiated in good faith throughout the collective bargaining process, but -- because our revised bargaining proposal was not to its liking -- the union has decided to make good on Mr. Kessler's threat.
"There will ultimately be a new collective bargaining agreement, but the 2011-12 season is now in jeopardy."
Click to expand...
 
You know what makes this even crazier for me? People in my industry are in the middle of forming a union here in Portland thru IATSE. There was supposed to be a big meeting this morning and then we found out the person in charge (from Seattle) changed some wording in the contract without our knowledge and it would basically put the business that got us all into the industry here in Portland in jeopardy, probably making them shut down. There have been emails flying around calling out the union for misrepresentation! This shit is getting crazy for me!
 
Unions suck.


They used to be needed, but not anymore. I have friends that work for the teamsters, and they are paid WAY too much for what they bring to the table. When an uneducated person can earn a base salary of 50k with basically free benefits something in the system is broken.
 
Mediocre Man said:
I think the issue here though is that the owners can also show they were bargaining in good faith.....right?
Click to expand...

That is AN issue... but the reality (IMO) is that the owners have and DO participate in anticompetitive behavior. Maximum salaries. Restrictions on free agencies. The NBA draft.

None of those things are legal in most industries.

They were just fine because they were a part of a CBA. The CBA moved the legal analysis from antitrust to labor.

All the players have to do to move the analysis back to antitrust law is to exit from collective bargaining framework... and the owners in the NFL case called the players trade association a sham. And I think that they might have been right.

The NBA players are attempting, IMO, to dot their i's and cross their t's to properly transition to antitrust law. I don't know that they've done it successfull, but they're definitely closer than if they'd thrown up their hands in July and decertified.

The NBA filing that motion with the NLRB is like a parking garage putting up a sign saying that it's not responsible for the actions of its employees--it IS responsible, and the sign doesn't change that. The NLRB filing might slow down the process and might have deterred the players from going down this road, but I'm not sure it's enough to stop the players from getting away from labor law.

A basic question in applying antitrust law, though, as it applies to professional sports, is whether society is better served by allowing unfettered player movement and contracts to exist--even if it means killing the sport. I don't know how that basic question would be answered, and I doubt either side in the NBA fight knows, either.

Ed O.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top