Jump to content

NHL Scabs


CC97

Recommended Posts

If the NHL was to go with replacement players what would happen to the Maple Leafs and Senators... The Province of Ontario (B.C. too, I think) has a law preventing companies from hiring replacement workers in the case of a strike or lockout (see 95/96 NBA Referee Strike).

Has anyone heard what would happen to the leafs, sens and canucks in this instance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. This Canucks Corner blog entry sheds a little light on the subject, but it seems to based on U.S. law, so I don't know what impact it would have on teams in Canada. Then again, with the NHL having its offices in and being based out of New York, U.S. law may be the only law that matters in this case.

But when the NBA Refs were on strike in 95, replacement refs weren't allowed for Raptors home games, they just used the real referees for only those games.

I heard somewhere that the Blue Jays were going to play 162 road games in 1995 if the replacement players were used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found this column by Al Strachan on a Leafs message board, FWIW:

-------------------------

NHL facing uphill fight

Judging from some feedback, there still are some fans who feel that the National Hockey League could go through the necessary hoops to get a negotiation impasse declared and then use that status to bring in replacement players.

With that in mind, let's look a bit further at what would probably happen if the NHL were to apply to the National Labor Relations Board in the United States to have an impasse declared.

First of all, the NLRB wouldn't want to hear the case. It made that point crystal clear when Major League Baseball tried to go down this path.

But just for the sake of argument, let's say the NLRB did agree to consider the NHL's argument.

"Have you negotiated in good faith?" would be the first question.

The NHL would have to answer that it has, but the NHL Players' Association, which presumably would oppose the NHL's request, would say, "No you haven't. To negotiate, you have to budge off your opening stance and you haven't done that. Your opening stance was a hard cap and you never moved off it."

Strike one.

But once again, let us stretch belief and assume that the NLRB accepts the non-negotiation between the two sides somehow counts as negotiation.

At that point, it would put the NHL to a strict burden of proof with regard to its status as a company like any other under the NLRB's jurisdiction.

"How many of these affected employees have you hired in the past five years?" the NLRB will ask.

"Hire? We didn't hire any of them. Our 30 teams hired them after drafting them."

"Drafting them? That's against the law under the Sherman Anti-trust Act, and for Canadian teams, it contravenes the Competition Act."

At that point the NHL will argue that the Sherman Act can be circumvented if both parties agree. But you can bet your boots the NHLPA would withhold its agreement.

Strike two.

Furthermore, if the NHL were somehow to get the right to use replacements, it would want each team to be able to retain the rights to its players. It wouldn't want them waltzing off as total free agents upon the terminations of each contract.

Again, that's illegal if it is done unilaterally. The NLRB isn't going to allow the NHL to implement a system that is illegal.

Strike three.

The NLRB also is going to ask the NHL to provide legal precedents to show why it should be able to, in essence, break its union.

Of course, there are no such precedents. No sports league has ever been granted impasse status. The NLRB considers impasses between companies and unions that can't come to terms. But the NHL isn't a company in the sense that Ford or GM are companies.

Strike four.

Even the NHL, which always wants its own rules, is out after four strikes.

No impasse ruling.

And, therefore, no replacement players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the 1995 Blue Jays, from CBC's archives...

"In January 1995, as the strike dragged on, the league approved using replacement players. Some teams hired replacement players for the new season's spring training and exhibition games. Others refused to use them.

Ontario law does not allow the use of replacement workers in a labour dispute, so the Toronto Blue Jays received permission to play regular season games at their spring training park in Dunedin, Fla. The Blue Jays coaching staff was assigned to minor league activities so they wouldn't have to deal with replacement players."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the irony behind the fact that while the NHLPA (which is a registered union) will not tolerate scab players in the league, they are perfectly okay with having member go over to the clubs in Europe and play there, effectively throwing the local players off of their teams.

Gotta love that crazy hypocrisy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This entire thing is enough to make me want to smack Bettman and Goodenow over the head with a goalie stick, tape them on top of a zamboni, and parade them around hockey cities, letting the faithful pelt them with eggs, tomatoes, and heavy mining equipment.

Then we stop over in Winnipeg, and let the JetsOwner.com campagin plead its case. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever happened to the idea of disbanding the league and starting over under a new name? The owners and league own the rights to everything.

Implement whatever you want and go from there. Then the players can resign under the new structure, or go to Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. This Canucks Corner blog entry sheds a little light on the subject, but it seems to based on U.S. law, so I don't know what impact it would have on teams in Canada. Then again, with the NHL having its offices in and being based out of New York, U.S. law may be the only law that matters in this case.

But when the NBA Refs were on strike in 95, replacement refs weren't allowed for Raptors home games, they just used the real referees for only those games.

I heard somewhere that the Blue Jays were going to play 162 road games in 1995 if the replacement players were used.

wouldnt be much different than the Expos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the 1995 Blue Jays, from CBC's archives...

"In January 1995, as the strike dragged on, the league approved using replacement players. Some teams hired replacement players for the new season's spring training and exhibition games. Others refused to use them.

Ontario law does not allow the use of replacement workers in a labour dispute, so the Toronto Blue Jays received permission to play regular season games at their spring training park in Dunedin, Fla. The Blue Jays coaching staff was assigned to minor league activities so they wouldn't have to deal with replacement players."

Nevermind on that idea. THe Leafs and Sens can't do that.

As for a new league there are problems with that. The players would probably then take the owners to court which would hold up the new league. Whether the players win or not is one thing, however it would go into the courts. The new league might be held up to the point where it would be faster to get a new cba. If it did go to court the same questions brought up about replacemnt players in the above article would be brought up. It would be 50/50 at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would never work in a union town like Philly. Remember the 1987 NFL Players strike?

All I remember from 1987 is pissing on the kindergarden classroom carpet and my teacher forcing me to clean it up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would never work in a union town like Philly.  Remember the 1987 NFL Players strike?

All I remember from 1987 is pissing on the kindergarden classroom carpet and my teacher forcing me to clean it up!

i whiz in a lot of my customers' backyards and I get away with it :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the irony behind the fact that while the NHLPA (which is a registered union) will not tolerate scab players in the league, they are perfectly okay with having member go over to the clubs in Europe and play there, effectively throwing the local players off of their teams.

Gotta love that crazy hypocrisy!

How is that hypocrisy? The NHL players in Europe are not scabs. Scabs are workers who take the jobs of union employees on strike. Neither the NHL nor any league in Europe, as far as I know, is on strike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Would never work in a union town like Philly.  Remember the 1987 NFL Players strike?"

"All I remember from 1987 is P!$$ing on the kindergarden classroom carpet and my teacher forcing me to clean it up!

No, seriously. Only a handful of fans showed up (about 4,000), and truckers surrounded The Vet by blaring their horns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.