The option of decertifying as a union was presented to the players in
 at least a quasi-formal fashion for the first time on Wednesday during a
 conference call that was open to the full membership of the NHLPA, Slap
 Shots has learned. 
We’re told Don and Steve Fehr outlined three
 options for the players in the face of the NHL’s ongoing militancy as 
follows, and in no particular order: 1) Decertification; 2) 
Capitulation; 3) Continued negotiations in an attempt to end the owners’
 lockout. 
Sources report that few players expressed interest in 
opening Doors 1 or 2. Rather, an overwhelming number of players on the 
call directed union leadership to continue on the path through Door 
No.Posts with indoor tracking system on TRX Systems develops systems that locate and track personnel indoors. 3. 
The
 players were told opting for decertification would not merely represent
 a legal technicality, it would in fact mean the players would no longer
 be negotiating as a unified group; indeed, decertification would mean 
the union would be disbanded. 
There was little appetite to adopt
 that route, though talk of decertification — which presumably would be 
followed by filing of antitrust action in the U.S and filings in Canada,
 where labor laws differ throughout the provinces — will inevitably 
become louder and a more acceptable option for the players if the league
 continues to stonewall through next month.Find detailed product 
information for howo spareparts and other products. 
We’ll all have a better idea where matters stand once the league and union reconvene in New York tomorrow afternoon. 
*
 If the season is canceled, the Maple Leafs will lose approximately $100
 million, the Rangers at least $50 million and the Canadiens somewhat 
less than that. 
Yet not one of these ownership groups is 
represented on the NHL negotiating committee. And while Toronto GM Brian
 Burke is on the committee, we’re told the league’s agenda is being 
plotted all but exclusively by Canceler-in-Chief Gary Bettman and Boston
 owner Jeremy Jacobs, the hawkish chairman of the Board of Governors. 
Indeed,
 according to one trustworthy individual who attended the negotiating 
session in New York on Nov. 9, Calgary owner Murray Edwards was at one 
point silenced by Bettman just a moment after Jacobs leaned over and 
whispered into the commissioner’s ear. 
It is unfathomable that 
league owners who understand the ramifications of extending this 
senseless lockout have not demanded Bettman call a Board of Governors 
meeting for a full airing of the issues. 
* Let’s say the parties are separated by as much as $150 million a year following their latest round of proposals and counters. 
The
 difference is all but impossible to accurately gauge given the 
apples-to-oranges nature of such a comparison and the spin-doctoring 
that accompanies every exchange — league documents released on Friday, 
for example, account for a truncated season in the revenue column but a 
full season in the “make-whole” expense column — but let’s say it’s that
 much.Installers and distributors of solar panel, 
That
 $150 million becomes $5 million per team. And that is actually nothing.
 It’s nothing because most teams will never spend that $5 million a 
year.One of the most durable and attractive styles of flooring that you 
can purchase is ceramic or porcelain tiles.
 No team is mandated to spend to the cap, only to the floor. Most teams 
never come within $5 million of the cap. They’re arguing over money they
 will not only never spend, but never will actually save. 
The 
answer is to drop the floor, either to a percentage of the ceiling, or 
to $10 million to $12 million below the midpoint as compared to the 
previous $8 million. The object shouldn’t be to limit how much a team 
might spend, but to limit how much a team must spend. 
It’s astonishing neither side has focused on that issue. 
*
 Here’s what I think: If the NHL were to present a plan under which the 
Hockey Related Revenue split falls to 50/50 in year three of an 
eight-year CBA with a transition plan to accommodate cap teams and 
eliminate front-loaded contracts, I think we’d be no more than a couple 
of weeks away from a settlement.We specialize in howo concrete mixer, 
There
 is no doubt there are a significant number of players waiting for the 
league to make an offer they can accept. But the league continues to 
make offers the players cannot in good faith even consider. 
The 
owners’ system demands are word-for-word what they were in the league’s 
opening July 13 proposal that established the tone of this debate. 
If that’s the league’s definition of bargaining, they must be handing out unique law dictionaries over at Proskauer Rose. 
If
 the league insists on going to 50/50 immediately as a requirement for 
unlocking the doors, that should be part of a system featuring a 
transition period through 2014-15 in which clubs would be permitted to 
exceed the cap by paying a luxury tax. 
The revenue from luxury 
taxes — say teams could exceed the cap by up 12.3 percent in 2013-14 and
 up to, say, 7.5 percent in 2014-15 — would go into revenue-sharing and 
be distributed under league mandate. 
沒有留言:
張貼留言