Green Bay Packers Forum

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
5 Pages«<345
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Pack93z  
#41 Posted : Monday, December 17, 2012 9:16:22 PM(UTC)
Rank: Select Member

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Applause Given: 437
Applause Received: 1,232
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.
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#42 Posted : Monday, December 17, 2012 9:42:11 PM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 26
Applause Received: 958
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.
Offline Pack93z  
#43 Posted : Monday, December 17, 2012 9:56:05 PM(UTC)
Rank: Select Member

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Applause Given: 437
Applause Received: 1,232
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.


Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#44 Posted : Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:11:22 AM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 26
Applause Received: 958
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.
Offline Porforis  
#45 Posted : Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:17:56 AM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

United States
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Applause Given: 342
Applause Received: 642
This is PackersHome.com, not FootballLawyersHome.com.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Zero2Cool on 12/18/2012(UTC)
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#46 Posted : Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:37:36 AM(UTC)
Rank: Veteran Member

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 26
Applause Received: 958
I've been staying at a Holiday Inn Express just for this conversation. Don't want to waste it.
Offline Pack93z  
#47 Posted : Tuesday, December 18, 2012 8:21:48 AM(UTC)
Rank: Select Member

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Applause Given: 437
Applause Received: 1,232
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.
Offline PackerTraxx  
#48 Posted : Friday, December 28, 2012 9:37:06 AM(UTC)
Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 8/13/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 139
Applause Received: 237
Don't expand.
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages«<345
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
uffda udfa (5h) : Sit Davante if he has a bad ankle. We remember 2015.
uffda udfa (5h) : Davante is not going to practice until SAT at earliest.
uffda udfa (5h) : Davante and Jordy may be inactive at ATL.
Smokey (6h) : ROFL !!
Cheesey (6h) : The Packers SMOKED the COWBOYS!!!LOL!
Smokey (6h) : Ever Smoke a Turkey, it takes lots of rolling papers. LOL
Smokey (6h) : Thanks Cheesey. LOL
Cheesey (6h) : Smokey, it was chicken gizzards (and hearts)!
Cheesey (6h) : So let's just start by saying, I love you!
Zero2Cool (7h) : Great, Geronimo Allison is on the injury report.
Zero2Cool (7h) : Most irritating tweets/tweet starters: 1) This >>> 2) Yep, ...3) There it is.... 4) Not good 5) XX doing XX things 6) Because xxx
Zero2Cool (11h) : Belichick when asked to discuss the importance of having the home crowd behind them: “I don’t know. Go ask Dallas and Kansas City.” …Oof.
Smokey (12h) : BRAVO, ZERO !
Zero2Cool (12h) : Something to watch: Last time both road teams won the Conference title games? 2012.. when New England and Atlanta hosted.
Zero2Cool (13h) : When Ty Montgomery is contacted within 1 yard of the LOS, he averages 4.5 YPC, best for RBs. Atlanta allowed 2.0 YPC, 4th worst for defenses
Zero2Cool (14h) : ProFootballFocus says Packers have 7th best front seven. Falcons 24th.
uffda udfa (14h) : *you're
uffda udfa (14h) : Tell me how to win your heart for I haven't got a clue.
uffda udfa (14h) : Is it me your looking for?
Smokey (15h) : Hello ?
Smokey (16h) : WHAT HAPPENED WITH "CRIXUS", OUR NEWEST MEMBER ?
uffda udfa (20h) : WELCOME Rick12...wonder what the 12 is for? :)
uffda udfa (20h) : The former per Mike Silver of NFLN
uffda udfa (20h) : Falcons OC, Kyle Shanahan "almost certain" to take Niners job. That's a terrible distraction for them.
Smokey (20h) : WELCOME to the forum crixus.
Smokey (23h) : Coffee or Hot Chocolate ?
Smokey (23h) : French Toast or Pancakes ?
Smokey (18-Jan) : Sausage or Bacon ?
Zero2Cool (17-Jan) : Falcons have officially placed DL Adrian Clayborn on IR
Zero2Cool (17-Jan) : Why? What's the difference? Can you cook same meals with one?
hardrocker950 (17-Jan) : Get a pressure cooker and your crock pot will collect dust lol
Zero2Cool (17-Jan) : Bill Vinovich is our ref. You might remember him from 4th and 26.
Smokey (17-Jan) : They were chicken livers, and they are fabulous . LOL
uffda udfa (17-Jan) : Not if Matt Ryan puts up a 40 passer rating. :) The last two were unfavorable conditions. This is dome time.
Cheesey (17-Jan) : Smokey, went to fire up the crock pot to slow cook some chicken gizzards, it burned out!
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2016 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 11 @ 12:00 PM
at Jaguars
Sunday, Sep 18 @ 7:30 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Sep 25 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Oct 2 @ 12:00 AM
BYE
Sunday, Oct 9 @ 7:30 PM
GIANTS
Sunday, Oct 16 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Thursday, Oct 20 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 30 @ 3:25 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Nov 6 @ 3:25 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Nov 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Titans
Sunday, Nov 20 @ 7:30 PM
at Redskins
Monday, Nov 28 @ 7:30 PM
at Eagles
Sunday, Dec 4 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Dec 11 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Dec 18 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Saturday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Jan 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Lions

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
13m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

27m / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

43m / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

52m / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

3h / Fantasy Sports Talk / hardrocker950

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / hardrocker950

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

7h / Community Welcome! / wpr

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Porforis

11h / Around The NFL / Smokey


Packers Headlines