Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
3 Pages<123

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Pack93z  
#41 Posted : Monday, December 17, 2012 9:16:22 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins said: Go to Quoted Post
As i read the article and section what it says, as it pertains to the subject at hand. That the NFLPA would need to show that the league adding playoff teams, would significantly affect the terms and conditions of their employment.

It doesn't say that any change to the bylaws or nfl constitution has to go through the PA. Only if the change would significantly affect the terms.

And I don't see how they would establish significant change when the compensation and structure is already set.



92 additional players performing in the postseason would not constitute a significant change? And the other teams players having to perform in additional games as well because of the add.

But yet changing the cutdown days would be a significant change? Adding a IR exemption that would effect at the max 32 players is considered a significant change. Yes, adding a playoff team to each league is a significant change to the bylaws. Citing case example, the IR exemption was almost shelved because the NFLPA and NFL couldn't originally come to terms on concessions.. eventually they came back to the table and hammered it out.

Continue to believe as you may.
PackFanWithTwins  
#42 Posted : Monday, December 17, 2012 9:42:11 PM(UTC)
Pack93z said: Go to Quoted Post
92 additional players performing in the postseason would not constitute a significant change? And the other teams players having to perform in additional games as well because of the add.

But yet changing the cutdown days would be a significant change? Adding a IR exemption that would effect at the max 32 players is considered a significant change. Yes, adding a playoff team to each league is a significant change to the bylaws. Citing case example, the IR exemption was almost shelved because the NFLPA and NFL couldn't originally come to terms on concessions.. eventually they came back to the table and hammered it out.

Continue to believe as you may.


No 92 additional players wouldn't be a significant change as it pertains to the CBA. It is still 4 wild card games being played and the same number of players playing in them. And the payment and practice schedules are specified. Players are getting paid for the games they play.

And yes, cut down days, IR exemption was significant because how and when the players can practice and come is something that had to be spelled out that wasn't.
Pack93z  
#43 Posted : Monday, December 17, 2012 9:56:05 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins said: Go to Quoted Post
No 92 additional players wouldn't be a significant change as it pertains to the CBA. It is still 4 wild card games being played and the same number of players playing in them. And the payment and practice schedules are specified. Players are getting paid for the games they play.

And yes, cut down days, IR exemption was significant because how and when the players can practice and come is something that had to be spelled out that wasn't.



But that is the thing... the IR and cut down days/player counts were defined. They amended the bylaws to change them.

In the same fashion that adding work days to at least 92 players is a significant change to their contract, the league year and schedules. I say as least 92 players, as there are other players that will be required to practice and prepare for additional games. Matters little that the compensation is set, it does matter that at least 92 players are putting their bodies and careers at risk for additional games. Hence why it would amount to a significant change.

The roster counts and cutdowns is a more valid comparison, the league is asking for and extending the work schedule for union workers. Similar to what they are asking for by adding playoff games.


PackFanWithTwins  
#44 Posted : Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:11:22 AM(UTC)
Pack93z said: Go to Quoted Post
But that is the thing... the IR and cut down days/player counts were defined. They amended the bylaws to change them.

In the same fashion that adding work days to at least 92 players is a significant change to their contract, the league year and schedules. I say as least 92 players, as there are other players that will be required to practice and prepare for additional games. Matters little that the compensation is set, it does matter that at least 92 players are putting their bodies and careers at risk for additional games. Hence why it would amount to a significant change.

The roster counts and cutdowns is a more valid comparison, the league is asking for and extending the work schedule for union workers. Similar to what they are asking for by adding playoff games.




It isn't adding work days to what any player expects or hopes to be playing when the preseason starts. You seem to be thinking of it like they are being told they have to work labor day. If it went to court, all that would need to be done is ask any player. When the season starts, do you hope to be playing in the playoffs. they would all answer yes.

A similar situation would have been when the pro-bowl was moved from after the SB to before. It made it so None of the players in the superbowl could play so an additional group of players had the chance. It isn't an increase in the number of players who have to play, only a change in which players have the chance.
Porforis  
#45 Posted : Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:17:56 AM(UTC)
This is PackersHome.com, not FootballLawyersHome.com.
PackFanWithTwins  
#46 Posted : Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:37:36 AM(UTC)
I've been staying at a Holiday Inn Express just for this conversation. Don't want to waste it.
Pack93z  
#47 Posted : Tuesday, December 18, 2012 8:21:48 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins said: Go to Quoted Post
It isn't adding work days to what any player expects or hopes to be playing when the preseason starts. You seem to be thinking of it like they are being told they have to work labor day. If it went to court, all that would need to be done is ask any player. When the season starts, do you hope to be playing in the playoffs. they would all answer yes.

A similar situation would have been when the pro-bowl was moved from after the SB to before. It made it so None of the players in the superbowl could play so an additional group of players had the chance. It isn't an increase in the number of players who have to play, only a change in which players have the chance.


While I agree that the players might want to be in and still be playing, it doesn't mean that it doesn't affect the # of work days expected to the labor pool. It does and affects the work schedule for players, so the union is going to want to be involved. Even if it is just to get other concessions from the owners. It is the overstep that is the definition of today's unions, even when the change assists the workers, they still want to get more out of it. As much as I don't like union tactics overall, it doesn't change that the union is there and the legal contracts maintain that the union has to sign off on it.

Much like the IR exemption, it only helps players by being able to return to the field and possibly earn more incentives in their contracts. Yet the Union was standing in the NFL's path to make sure they approved a change to the possibly work contract of a player.

Players across the league are signed to a NFL contract, in that contract they are signing on for the defined league year as defined in the Bylaws and adopted by the CBA. Any change to that contract, which includes the playoffs, is changing the defined work agreed upon by the Union and NFL.

As far as the Holiday Inn comment, this is one area in which I actually have both experience and education. 5 years managing a Union Shop glass plant and 3 years of Business and Corporate law in college. There isn't a judge out there that is not going to agree that this isn't a significant change in the defined labor agreement.
PackerTraxx  
#48 Posted : Friday, December 28, 2012 9:37:06 AM(UTC)
Don't expand.
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages<123
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
buckeyepackfan (3h) : Smokey you can't lose something you never had.
buckeyepackfan (3h) : Packers receive 4 comp picks for 2018. 4th, 2-5ths, 6th
Smokey (9h) : Peters to the Rams
Smokey (9h) : and another player is lost to another team. Deja Vu again !
Nonstopdrivel (22-Feb) : should have done*
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Hi šŸ˜ŠšŸ˜‰
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : I guess I should have did a refresh when I walked away from the computer.
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : Peters is 25 with one year left on his contract at just over $3M
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Mel Kiper sticks with Marcus Davenport to GB in 2nd mock
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : As for Marcus Peters, how old is he an what's his contract years left?
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Packers got tired of Sitton's antics.
Zero2Cool (21-Feb) : Sitton was released not because of play or salary, but personality. He will not be re-signed.
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : If we are planning on possibly cutting Cobb I can see the 2nd round pick. A second round pick for Peters is a pretty good deal.
Smokey (21-Feb) : I'd offer Cobb + a 3rd round pick + a 6th round pick in 2019 for the CB Peters from KC.
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : I guess that is a highter round pick
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : Suggestion was a 2nd round pick. I would want a lower round pick. I think that is too much. A 3rd or 4th seems about right.
Smokey (21-Feb) : Cobb and WHAT PICK ?
TheKanataThrilla (21-Feb) : A suggestion I saw was a trade of Cobb and a Pick for Peters. I think that would be a great move.
Smokey (21-Feb) : Sitton was drafted be GB in 2008, not a young man at this point, but still is a "bear" of a man.
Cheesey (21-Feb) : Sitton? Maybe if the price is right.
Cheesey (21-Feb) : I doubt the Packers would try to resign Sutton. But who knows? If the price is right?
Zero2Cool (20-Feb) : Bears declining option on Josh Sitton. He'll be Free Agent.
Zero2Cool (20-Feb) : Chiefs CB Marcus Peters trade rumors -- come to Packers!
Smokey (20-Feb) : Join us in Packershome and be part of the discussion today .
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Elizabeeth ... good bye
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Saturday, August 19, 2017
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : That's dedicated spammng!
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : For some reason, I had to flush my DNS cache to access this site from my laptop today.
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : I prefer toads to frogs, Smokey, thank you very much.
Rockmolder (19-Feb) : My girlfriends says thanks, Rourke.
Smokey (19-Feb) : Nonstopdrivel that you most likely say to all the frogs you meet .
Nonstopdrivel (19-Feb) : Rockmolder's avatar is so fucking sexy.
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : never seen the interview before. tough to listen to. can't believe it was 7 years ago
gbguy20 (19-Feb) : just watched a nick Collins tribute on yourube. the end featured an interview with nick reflecting on his injury
buckeyepackfan (17-Feb) : Saints De'Vante Harris nothing but a POS!!!!! Look up his tweetes on Florida killings!!
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
35m / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

4h / Random Babble / Smokey

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

10h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

23-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

23-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

22-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Rockmolder

22-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

21-Feb / Random Babble / Smokey

21-Feb / Random Babble / Pack93z

21-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

Headlines