Wednesday, April 20, 2011
NFLPA takes its case to the classroom, talks about lockout with law students
By Joseph White, The Associated Press – 11 hours ago
WASHINGTON — Even as the players have made their case in court, the NFL Players Association is making its case in the classroom.
Representatives of the NFLPA were invited guests at the American University's Washington College of Law on Tuesday, answering questions from students about the league's decision to lock out the players and the court proceedings that have followed.
The NFLPA made a similar appearance at Rutgers last month. The programs help the former union — now technically a trade association — make sure that students and the public at large are fully aware of its side of the story.
"I understand there's a lot of fan frustration and fan anger — directed at both sides, frankly," Atallah said. "I understand that. I'm a fan of the game myself, so I'm sympathetic to it. I think at the end of the day the fans and people need to know the players have worked on resolving this and have been attempting to avoid it for more than two years now. ... It's not lost on me that people want to see their football."
The savvy students peppered Atallah and former player Nolan Harrison with various legal questions — the words "litigation," ''decertification," ''injunction" and "mediation" were uttered many times. While the parties are under orders from a judge not to talk about the ongoing court-ordered mediation talks in Minneapolis, Atallah reiterated that a negotiated settlement from those talks — rather than more legal wrangling — is the preferred outcome for the players.
"The unfortunate thing about the current state of the business of football is that anything outside of a litigation settlement takes us into the unknown," Atallah said.
Atallah and Harrison restated many NFLPA positions: that the league had been planning the lockout for years in advance, that the players never threatened to strike, that they never asked for more money than they were getting in their previous deal, that they're concerned about the economic impact on businesses such as restaurants if games aren't played and that it doesn't make sense to them to have draft picks pigeonholed into five-year contracts when the average career doesn't last that long.
Harrison responded with vigour to a student's question that referenced the dispute as one of millionaires versus billionaires.
"Let's be clear about things: No one can cry poverty in the NFL," Harrison said, "but not every player is making over a million dollars."
Harrison said many players are done by age 25 and "go back to being regular students, regular employees, regular businessmen."
"To be fair," he added, "not every owner's a billionaire. But they're pretty darn close."
Copyright © 2011 The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Former Players Message April 15, 2011
|
Thursday, April 14, 2011
The Smokescreen That Hides the Truth
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Sen. Jay Rockefeller urges NFL should open their books the NFLPA
WASHINGTON -- The chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee is urging NFL owners to open their financial books to the players' union, arguing that will help resolve a labor dispute.
"Reluctantly, I have come to the conclusion that the only way to sort out this stalemate is for the owners and the league to answer the biggest sticking point: money," Sen. Jay Rockefeller wrote in a Washington Post opinion column on Friday. "What I'd like to see from NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and the owners is a simple display of good faith: Show the union your books. Don't keep secrets. If there are financial pressures that keep you from agreeing to the revenue-sharing plan proposed by the players, let's see the proof."
Rockefeller, D-W.Va., suggested that a neutral third party review the financial data, remove anything sensitive and prepare an assessment of the league's finances.
The NFL declined to comment on Rockefeller's suggestion, citing a request by federal mediator George Cohen that the two sides not discuss negotiations while they're in mediation. Those negotiations are scheduled to resume next week.
The league has previously said that the union, which has made similar demands, already has access to all relevant financial information.
The biggest sticking point between the two sides is how to divide about $9 billion in annual revenues. The current collective bargaining agreement expires at 11:59 p.m. ET Thursday, and the union has said it expects a lockout to come as soon as the following day.
The NFL hasn't argued that it's losing money, only that it needs to keep a bigger share to finance costs such as stadium construction.
Rockefeller acknowledged that "some owners make significant investments while managing a professional sports team and I don't want to play down their long-term expenses and obligations. But the players deserve a good-faith effort to demonstrate that these expenses are real and not just an excuse."
He said that so far, he's kept a "hands-off" approach to the negotiations, aside from conversations on the status of the talks.
But he also said that Congress, "acting in the public interest, has to keep the NFL on track because of the great benefits given to the league by federal law and taxpayer funds and because of its impact on the nation's economy."
One key benefit that the NFL enjoys -- along with other professional sports -- is an antitrust exemption for broadcasting contracts. That exemption, which allows the NFL to sign TV contracts on behalf of all teams, helped to transform the league into the economic powerhouse it is today.
As to what the committee will do if the NFL doesn't provide the information, Rockefeller spokesman Vince Morris said that the senator is keeping all options open but is mainly focused on encouraging the two sides to sort this out themselves.
Gary Roberts, dean of Indiana University Law School in Indianapolis and an expert on sports, antitrust and labor law, said that whether an employer is required to open its books depends on what it argues during the collective bargaining process.
"If owners make representations that they're losing money or that they can't afford a certain term in the collective bargaining agreement, then they're obligated to prove their assertion," he said.
In my personal opinion Gary Roberts said it best, and of course I'm not being biased being because he is representing Indiana University, the owners are obligated to prove why the players need to take a $1 billion pay cut, to prove why hundreds of thousands of people will be put out of work when there is a lockout, to prove how record viewership and $9 billion in revenue is not a successful business model.
Nolan Harrison III
Senior Director
NFLPA
Former Players Services