I've written post about the lock out from the perspective of sitting at the negotiating table myself. I'm a union steward for my shop and represented the employees in contract talks with the company I work for. Fortunately we were not in a lock out situation like the players.
The other thing to consider is that the NFL labor situation is unique and different than the private sector. Basically it is a group of workers negotiating a collective bargaining agreement. In the private sector that CBA pretty much sets working conditions and pay. Pay is the key difference between the two types of CBAs. My CBA sets wages, a wage scale and raises. In the professional sports world, pay is individually negotiated by agents as well as pay raises and other perks. There are some guidelines on what can and cannot be included in an individual contract. There is a player standard contract that meets minimum requirements and spells out certain expectations like player conduct. Finally, the league office and the players union must also sign off on it.
According to the latest reports, both sides have reached tentative agreements on most the major issues. The two outstanding issues are the rookie wage scale and an issue with free agency.
As for the rookie wage scale, some basic parameters have been set but how many rookies will it affect and the length of contracts they can sign appear to be the issues. The owners want to include several first round picks in the draft subject to the scale. Since there is a gentlemen's agreement on slotting rookie contracts, they only need to agree where the scale starts and how many players it covers. After that, by the slotting system, the scale trickles down to the lower drafted players.
There is a good side bar in an ESPN.com story on the rookie wage scale. I highly recommend reading it. I can't do it justice trying to explain it here.
I think the rookie wage scale is workable. I can't see how it would scuttle the rest of the agreement. The biggest issue, the revenue split, is agreed upon. That was the issue that potentially could have shortened or canceled the season. With that out of the way, unless some boneheaded owners dig in, the CBA should be done soon. Keep in mind it only takes a few owners to sink the agreement. To ratify the deal, 24 out of 32 owners need to approve the deal. It will take 9 owners to sink an agreement.
Showing posts with label NFL Labor Dispute. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NFL Labor Dispute. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Saturday, February 19, 2011
NFL and Players In Mediation
Previously I gave my perspective on the bargaining process. To reiterate, deal making usually happens in the last days of negotiations and sometimes take a few days past the deadline by extending the existing CBA for 24-48 hours. That usually happens when sides are very close to a deal and just have a few things to iron out.
Entering mediation for the final two weeks of the current deal looks like a positive step. It signals that both sides are serious about working a deal out. Things didn't look so good when two days were scheduled and the second day was canceled.
George Cohen is tasked with bringing the two sided to an agreement. Cohen isn't unfamiliar with sports CBA negotiations. He handled the MLS and MLS players union and they ultimately got a deal done.
Of course, the NFL is a much bigger fish. Billions of dollars are at stake and neither side wants to give in.
Cohen's job will be to make recommendations and try and find a middle ground.
Psychologically it helps the sided more agreeable to new ideas. If it comes from an outside neutral party then the two sides can view that the other side didn't make the proposal. Maybe both parties will be more at ease accepting ideas from a third party versus one side basically making demands and the other side rejecting it.
An article on George Cohen linked by Stephanie Stradley.
I haven't read the blog yet but John McClain states the positives of mediation in his blog.
They met two days already but are under a gag order so news is coming out of the conferences. The talks are planned for two weeks. Each day they negotiate the odds get better a deal will get done. If talks are called off then a work stoppage is extremely likely.
All us fans can do is hope for the best and prepare for a draft watching party.
Entering mediation for the final two weeks of the current deal looks like a positive step. It signals that both sides are serious about working a deal out. Things didn't look so good when two days were scheduled and the second day was canceled.
George Cohen is tasked with bringing the two sided to an agreement. Cohen isn't unfamiliar with sports CBA negotiations. He handled the MLS and MLS players union and they ultimately got a deal done.
Of course, the NFL is a much bigger fish. Billions of dollars are at stake and neither side wants to give in.
Cohen's job will be to make recommendations and try and find a middle ground.
Psychologically it helps the sided more agreeable to new ideas. If it comes from an outside neutral party then the two sides can view that the other side didn't make the proposal. Maybe both parties will be more at ease accepting ideas from a third party versus one side basically making demands and the other side rejecting it.
An article on George Cohen linked by Stephanie Stradley.
I haven't read the blog yet but John McClain states the positives of mediation in his blog.
They met two days already but are under a gag order so news is coming out of the conferences. The talks are planned for two weeks. Each day they negotiate the odds get better a deal will get done. If talks are called off then a work stoppage is extremely likely.
All us fans can do is hope for the best and prepare for a draft watching party.
Monday, February 7, 2011
My Insights Into NFL Labor Negotiations
I'm not going to rehash all the points reported and discussed in the media. Instead I'm going to offer my basic insight on labor negotiations. Last year I sat on the union side of the table as a negotiator for a new labor contract with the company I work for. It was very stressful, tiring and educational.
The first point to realize is that March 3rd is not a hard deadline. It is common practice in my industry to renew the current contract on a rolling basis during negotiations. If negotiations are progressing and the deadline looms, both parties usually mutually agree to renew the existing contract every 24 hours. This allows negotiations to continue beyond the deadline and avoid a work stoppage.
Another point to consider is that most deal making gets done in the last two weeks. My sessions met constantly for six weeks but the meat and potatoes wasn't really nailed down until the final three weeks. Right now some wonder why there is no sense of urgency between the two sides. There is but right now they are involved in waging the war of public relations. Saturday before the Super Bowl they had a formal full session between both negotiating committees. Expect more frequent meetings after the Super Bowl. Most of the deal making gets done off the record as evidence by informal meetings between NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith.
Both sides know the parameters of what they will accept and won't accept. It's a giant game. Both sides overshoot what they are seeking and eventually look to meet in that middle common ground. As an example, in my negotiations we knew already what we going to get as raises for the length of the new contract. We have an industry standard and the union and company know the standard is the outcome. Yet we over shot the standard and of course the company lowballed their offer. In the course of two days, offers and counter offers were passed over the negotiating table and we eventually met at the industry standard. Why this game is played I really don't know. I just know from first hand experience that it is.
The bottom line is that the NFL is a cash cow for both sides. The owners want a little more of the revenue back and I can't say I blame them. The players want to keep what they won in previous negotiations. I can't blame them either. I think the players will end up giving back some of the revenue but not as much as the owners want. In return, they will get a rookie scale to free up more money for vets instead of unproven high picks. Also I think the owners will give more benefits or money for retired players.
If there is a work stoppage, it will be over free agency, salary caps and maybe a cadre of hardline owners who will refuse to bend any toward the players demands.
I read in a Sporting News Daily article that the owners can start imposing work rules on players once the deadline passes. The players can stop it by appealing to the National Labor Board. From what I understand this is not true. The owners can only impose new rules on the players if negotiations reach an impasse. For impasse to occur, the NFLPA must show an unwillingness to make any movement or progress in negotiations. As long as they continue to negotiate in good faith, owners cannot declare an impasse. A lock out is not impasse. An lock out is the owners refusing to allow the players to return to work without a new contract or renewal of the old one. During the lock out, negotiations could continue and make progress.
In the end, both sides will not shoot the golden goose. They will get a deal done before the draft and camps will open on time. Of course, that's just my opinion. There could be a complete meltdown across the table. Hot heads might prevail and gum up the process.
The first point to realize is that March 3rd is not a hard deadline. It is common practice in my industry to renew the current contract on a rolling basis during negotiations. If negotiations are progressing and the deadline looms, both parties usually mutually agree to renew the existing contract every 24 hours. This allows negotiations to continue beyond the deadline and avoid a work stoppage.
Another point to consider is that most deal making gets done in the last two weeks. My sessions met constantly for six weeks but the meat and potatoes wasn't really nailed down until the final three weeks. Right now some wonder why there is no sense of urgency between the two sides. There is but right now they are involved in waging the war of public relations. Saturday before the Super Bowl they had a formal full session between both negotiating committees. Expect more frequent meetings after the Super Bowl. Most of the deal making gets done off the record as evidence by informal meetings between NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith.
Both sides know the parameters of what they will accept and won't accept. It's a giant game. Both sides overshoot what they are seeking and eventually look to meet in that middle common ground. As an example, in my negotiations we knew already what we going to get as raises for the length of the new contract. We have an industry standard and the union and company know the standard is the outcome. Yet we over shot the standard and of course the company lowballed their offer. In the course of two days, offers and counter offers were passed over the negotiating table and we eventually met at the industry standard. Why this game is played I really don't know. I just know from first hand experience that it is.
The bottom line is that the NFL is a cash cow for both sides. The owners want a little more of the revenue back and I can't say I blame them. The players want to keep what they won in previous negotiations. I can't blame them either. I think the players will end up giving back some of the revenue but not as much as the owners want. In return, they will get a rookie scale to free up more money for vets instead of unproven high picks. Also I think the owners will give more benefits or money for retired players.
If there is a work stoppage, it will be over free agency, salary caps and maybe a cadre of hardline owners who will refuse to bend any toward the players demands.
I read in a Sporting News Daily article that the owners can start imposing work rules on players once the deadline passes. The players can stop it by appealing to the National Labor Board. From what I understand this is not true. The owners can only impose new rules on the players if negotiations reach an impasse. For impasse to occur, the NFLPA must show an unwillingness to make any movement or progress in negotiations. As long as they continue to negotiate in good faith, owners cannot declare an impasse. A lock out is not impasse. An lock out is the owners refusing to allow the players to return to work without a new contract or renewal of the old one. During the lock out, negotiations could continue and make progress.
In the end, both sides will not shoot the golden goose. They will get a deal done before the draft and camps will open on time. Of course, that's just my opinion. There could be a complete meltdown across the table. Hot heads might prevail and gum up the process.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
NFL Overtime Rule, Clarification of Networks Paying NFL in Work Stoppage
The NFL Overtime Rule Change
I wrote in a previous post that I somewhat like the playoff overtime rule change that it didn’t go far enough.
My biggest problem with the change is that teams are playing under a different set of rules in the post season. In the regular season, a coin toss, field position and a kick can win a game. In the post season it won’t. Why different criteria for overtime playoff wins?
I do think the change is a step in the right direction but it needs to extend to regular season and tweaked some more.
At the very least, both teams should be given one possession and a chance to win the game. Regardless of a first possession touchdown, let the other team get a shot at winning the game.
I find one possible change interesting. I would allow a sudden death one possession victory under one circumstance. The current playoff rule will allow a one possession win if a team scores a TD. I say take the one possession rule one step further. A TD alone doesn’t warrant a victory. I propose changing the rule to allowing a sudden death victory only if a TD and successful two point conversion are scored.
A missed two point attempt leaves a six point lead and allows the second team a shot at winning with a TD and one point conversion. I think it is a simple tweak that would make for more interesting finishes. A coach could gamble to seal the deal on a two pointer or play it safe and go for one. It’s a high risk but high reward scenario. If after one possession for each team then the game reverts to sudden death on any score. Even if a team fails to score the two points, they still maintain the advantage and can win the game with a defensive stop.
The downside is given the conservative nature of most coaches the two point conversion may never come into play.
I’m just throwing out some food for thought.
NFL Network Money and Work Stoppage
In Pro Football Weekly’s April 2010 issue, Barry Jackson quotes a network source about television money paid to the NFL in the even of a work stoppage. The source confirmed that the networks will pay the league but the amount of payments will be deducted from any money due once play starts up again.
Basically the networks will advance money to the NFL during a strike/lockout situation to help clubs keep in operations. Despite the stoppage, bills continue to accrue like stadium maintenance, staff payroll and other organizational needs. The money just comes out of the next year’s network payments.
Good to hear that cleared up. I know the networks pay out megabucks to the NFL for broadcast rights. However the payments for no product just didn’t make any sense on any level.
I wrote in a previous post that I somewhat like the playoff overtime rule change that it didn’t go far enough.
My biggest problem with the change is that teams are playing under a different set of rules in the post season. In the regular season, a coin toss, field position and a kick can win a game. In the post season it won’t. Why different criteria for overtime playoff wins?
I do think the change is a step in the right direction but it needs to extend to regular season and tweaked some more.
At the very least, both teams should be given one possession and a chance to win the game. Regardless of a first possession touchdown, let the other team get a shot at winning the game.
I find one possible change interesting. I would allow a sudden death one possession victory under one circumstance. The current playoff rule will allow a one possession win if a team scores a TD. I say take the one possession rule one step further. A TD alone doesn’t warrant a victory. I propose changing the rule to allowing a sudden death victory only if a TD and successful two point conversion are scored.
A missed two point attempt leaves a six point lead and allows the second team a shot at winning with a TD and one point conversion. I think it is a simple tweak that would make for more interesting finishes. A coach could gamble to seal the deal on a two pointer or play it safe and go for one. It’s a high risk but high reward scenario. If after one possession for each team then the game reverts to sudden death on any score. Even if a team fails to score the two points, they still maintain the advantage and can win the game with a defensive stop.
The downside is given the conservative nature of most coaches the two point conversion may never come into play.
I’m just throwing out some food for thought.
NFL Network Money and Work Stoppage
In Pro Football Weekly’s April 2010 issue, Barry Jackson quotes a network source about television money paid to the NFL in the even of a work stoppage. The source confirmed that the networks will pay the league but the amount of payments will be deducted from any money due once play starts up again.
Basically the networks will advance money to the NFL during a strike/lockout situation to help clubs keep in operations. Despite the stoppage, bills continue to accrue like stadium maintenance, staff payroll and other organizational needs. The money just comes out of the next year’s network payments.
Good to hear that cleared up. I know the networks pay out megabucks to the NFL for broadcast rights. However the payments for no product just didn’t make any sense on any level.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Tiger Woods, NFL Labor Strife
I picked the two items probably most written about in the sports world. I try not to do that. Sometimes I can't help it.
Eldrick Woods
Who cares? I don't. The man made a mistake. That mistake was getting married. One of the richest athletes on earth and one of the most recognizable faces on the planet messed up when he decided to tie himself to one woman.
By all reports, Woods is a tail hound. Good for him. He's married. Bad for him.
That's the problem with our conformist society. Expectations are for all of us to be pods. We are supposed to go to school, get a job, get married and have children. Basically that's a load of bullshit. Yet just about everybody does it if for no other reason as it's the "norm."
Parents put pressure on adult offspring for grandbabies. To put it bluntly,"Hey Mom and Dad, screw you. It's none of your business."
So Eldrick conformed. On top of the golf world, he married. I'm sure he was a babe hound long before he was married. That's his and the women's rights. He could screw his talent right out if he wanted. What two consenting adults do is their business only.
Instead of conforming, Woods should have just stayed single and enjoyed his carefree bachelor ways. Trust me, it's worth it.
NFL Labor Strife
I've read several articles from both points of view. The NFL owners and players are waging a media PR war on the labor issues. It's hard to see who is telling the truth.
Owners claim that they are losing money and want the players to give up a bigger slice of the revenue pie. The owners also assert that since players benefit from the capital investments, such as new stadiums and operating costs, the players should also contribute to the costs.
The players counter the claims of losing money. They want proof and have asked the NFL to open up the accounting books and prove it. The players don't want to give up money and revenue they've won in previous contract agreements. Players also say that once the salary cap goes away they won't ever agree to a new one.
This is what we all know. NFL is the most popular sport in the U.S. The revenue stream is no where near dry. Franchise values are enormous. Most stadiums are sold out on game day. Fans buy up merchandise and pay for parking spots. They even pay for the right to purchase seats in the form of PSLs.
The real fight is about who gets what percentage of the money. With all the merchandise, sold out stadiums, revenue sharing and outrageous TV money, I don't believe the owners stance that they are losing money.
What I think is there as some big revenue teams like the Cowboys, Giants, Redskins, Patriots and Texans that want to keep a bigger slice of what they bring in. Teams in Buffalo, Jacksonville and Green Bay want to keep the revenue sharing in place for fear of not being able to compete with the larger money teams.
The owners might be showing a united front but I think maybe something else is brewing. Keep in mind it's only my personal theory and it's based on nothing but thin air. The owners might try to get the players to give up a chunk of the revenue and spread some of that around to the medium to small market teams. The big market teams will take a bigger slice of what they bring in but use the players concessions in a contract to make up the loss of revenue to the smaller market teams.
In a work stoppage, the owners will make off like bandits. The owners will still receive TV money in the even of a work stoppage. According to that article, about $5 billion despite not playing a game. Also, clubs are planning cost cutting moves should 2011 schedule get cancelled.
The biggest dupes in this scheme are the television networks. Why the hell are they forking over money for a product that won't exist. Makes no sense.
The biggest losers will be the fans. We pay for the stadiums by social welfare via taxes. We watch the games on TV. We buy the tickets, jerseys and other merchandise. We show up on Sundays. Yet that loyalty will be repaid by a possible lockout or strike and a whole bunch of nothing to show for it.
Thanks NFL owners and players.
Eldrick Woods
Who cares? I don't. The man made a mistake. That mistake was getting married. One of the richest athletes on earth and one of the most recognizable faces on the planet messed up when he decided to tie himself to one woman.
By all reports, Woods is a tail hound. Good for him. He's married. Bad for him.
That's the problem with our conformist society. Expectations are for all of us to be pods. We are supposed to go to school, get a job, get married and have children. Basically that's a load of bullshit. Yet just about everybody does it if for no other reason as it's the "norm."
Parents put pressure on adult offspring for grandbabies. To put it bluntly,"Hey Mom and Dad, screw you. It's none of your business."
So Eldrick conformed. On top of the golf world, he married. I'm sure he was a babe hound long before he was married. That's his and the women's rights. He could screw his talent right out if he wanted. What two consenting adults do is their business only.
Instead of conforming, Woods should have just stayed single and enjoyed his carefree bachelor ways. Trust me, it's worth it.
NFL Labor Strife
I've read several articles from both points of view. The NFL owners and players are waging a media PR war on the labor issues. It's hard to see who is telling the truth.
Owners claim that they are losing money and want the players to give up a bigger slice of the revenue pie. The owners also assert that since players benefit from the capital investments, such as new stadiums and operating costs, the players should also contribute to the costs.
The players counter the claims of losing money. They want proof and have asked the NFL to open up the accounting books and prove it. The players don't want to give up money and revenue they've won in previous contract agreements. Players also say that once the salary cap goes away they won't ever agree to a new one.
This is what we all know. NFL is the most popular sport in the U.S. The revenue stream is no where near dry. Franchise values are enormous. Most stadiums are sold out on game day. Fans buy up merchandise and pay for parking spots. They even pay for the right to purchase seats in the form of PSLs.
The real fight is about who gets what percentage of the money. With all the merchandise, sold out stadiums, revenue sharing and outrageous TV money, I don't believe the owners stance that they are losing money.
What I think is there as some big revenue teams like the Cowboys, Giants, Redskins, Patriots and Texans that want to keep a bigger slice of what they bring in. Teams in Buffalo, Jacksonville and Green Bay want to keep the revenue sharing in place for fear of not being able to compete with the larger money teams.
The owners might be showing a united front but I think maybe something else is brewing. Keep in mind it's only my personal theory and it's based on nothing but thin air. The owners might try to get the players to give up a chunk of the revenue and spread some of that around to the medium to small market teams. The big market teams will take a bigger slice of what they bring in but use the players concessions in a contract to make up the loss of revenue to the smaller market teams.
In a work stoppage, the owners will make off like bandits. The owners will still receive TV money in the even of a work stoppage. According to that article, about $5 billion despite not playing a game. Also, clubs are planning cost cutting moves should 2011 schedule get cancelled.
The biggest dupes in this scheme are the television networks. Why the hell are they forking over money for a product that won't exist. Makes no sense.
The biggest losers will be the fans. We pay for the stadiums by social welfare via taxes. We watch the games on TV. We buy the tickets, jerseys and other merchandise. We show up on Sundays. Yet that loyalty will be repaid by a possible lockout or strike and a whole bunch of nothing to show for it.
Thanks NFL owners and players.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)