Quote:
Originally Posted by ila
I just read this morning that the NHLPA has rejected the league realignment. And this after the league's owners voted in favour of it and the fans want it. Perhaps it's time that the players learned who actually pays their salary and that they should just shutup and play when and where they're told to play. If they don't like it they can always quit. They are hundreds of other hockey players that would gladly take the current players' places to play in the NHL.
|
I write this during the first intermission of the Bruins-Canucks game, and don't have much time. If the game keeps on as it's going, I will have to go down to the Garden and put on a Bruins uniform so they'll have enough players to finish. I suspect every Boston-based Vancouver fan is being similarly recruited.
Anyhow, I read about the NHLPA rejection this morning, too. I think there's a bit more to this. According to Don Fehr, the NHLPA head, "In order to evaluate the effect on travel of the proposed new structure, we requested a draft or sample 2012-13 schedule, showing travel per team. We were advised it was not possible for the league to do that. We also suggested reaching an agreement on scheduling conditions to somewhat alleviate player travel concerns ... but the league did not want to enter into such a dialogue."
This seems to have been a reasonable request. The league's refusal (saying it was not possible) seems to be calculated deliberately to precipitate a confrontation with the union.
NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Day told the Associated Press, "We believe the union acted unreasonably in violation of the league's rights. We intend to evaluate all of our available legal options and to pursue adequate remedies, as appropriate."
This would not be the first time a boss has done something like this just for the chance to drag a union in front of a court or arbitrator to get a ruling in hopes of weakening that union.
I could be wrong, though. Who knows for sure?
Back to the game now ...