Disclaimer of Interest?

[kevinsrangers]

Decertifying = disbanding the union by the players saying "union management doesn't represent us". It's a complicated legal path to do it.
Disclaiming interest = disbanding the union by leadership saying "we no longer represent the players". Simpler to do legally.

The net effect is the same: no union for the NHL to negotiate with; no entity who can countersign a CBA.

The basketball player's union never actually disclaimed interest -- they just voted on their intention to pursue that path. In order to prevent that from happening, the NBA and the players got a deal done.

If the NHLPA disbands (not just votes their intention to pursue that course) then it blows up the league. No union means no CBA. The contracts are all governed by the CBA, which has the effect of letting the NHL (and players) establish marketplace rules that are different from the open markets (as defined by law) in the US and Canada. Disbanding the union would lead to all sorts of headaches and legal wrangling, which would blow up the season.

In short, this is the NHLPA's counter-threat to the NHL cancelling the season.

NHL: we're going to cancel the season if you don't come around and deal?
NHLPA: oh yeah? we're going to blow the whole thing up if you cancel the season.

Lots of legal arguments as to what might happen (NHL suspending operations to fend off antitrust suits, etc) but the truth is it's all without precedent.

this makes sense but if there close to na agreement then why are they thinking this way?

[ericdaoust]

this makes sense but if there close to na agreement then why are they thinking this way?

It's a move to try to speed up the process. Basically a bluff IMO. The owners' deal is better than sacrificing free hotels, free travel, benefits, etc that would have to be negotiated on an individual basis if there is no CBA.

[grindin griers]

It's a move to try to speed up the process. Basically a bluff IMO. The owners' deal is better than sacrificing free hotels, free travel, benefits, etc that would have to be negotiated on an individual basis if there is no CBA.

I agree. Also, any player that votes for this and was previously stating that they are fighting for future players down the road as well is full of it IMO. Future players would be better off entering the league with the owner's CBA offer than a league without a union (well the majority of future players would). Current players would be the only ones with a possibility of benefiting from the union disbanding due to the treble damages if ruled in the PA's favor but the majority would lose a lot of other benefits too.

[rangersfury]

But I don't see a reason why NHLPA shouldn't vote on NHL's proposal

What proposal? It was all pulled off the table last week in fit of theatrical rage. Maybe, maybe by the end of next week the NHL will come back to the table with some elements of the last offer but not before they sweat the players and try to break them one last time before Christmas.

[ericdaoust]

I agree. Also, any player that votes for this and was previously stating that they are fighting for future players down the road as well is full of it IMO. Future players would be better off entering the league with the owner's CBA offer than a league without a union (well the majority of future players would). Current players would be the only ones with a possibility of benefiting from the union disbanding due to the treble damages if ruled in the PA's favor but the majority would lose a lot of other benefits too.

Wouldn't the future generation benefit more from a league that doesn't have its growth potential take a kick to the groin (ie a bigger "revenue pie" to draw from)? They should have signed the deal to start in early November on an 82-game schedule. So much good will would have come from that.

[Kofax]

I could be wrong, but I thought a 'disclaimer of interest' was a necessary step towards decertifying.

I also think this is a bluff, but the fact that they are so close and still can't get a deal done means they are insane and anything is possible.

My take is that they will push it to the last possible moment, using every trick they can to try and pull it further to their side, ultimately coming to an agreement (but again, they have been idiots to this point, so who knows).

Didn't the NHL put the offer they pulled back on the table? Pulling that offer was all just talk, I don't think anyone truly believed it was really gone. That's where they would have been starting at with any further negotiations.

[grindin griers]

Wouldn't the future generation benefit more from a league that doesn't have its growth potential take a kick to the groin (ie a bigger "revenue pie" to draw from)? They should have signed the deal to start in early November on an 82-game schedule. So much good will would have come from that.

To answer your question, yes I completely agree. I know that the current player's intentions have always been to get a better deal for themselves as well. It's just that anyone, cough Erik Cole cough, that has previously said they want to make sure future players are not screwed over as well is completely disregarding that now if they vote for this authorization.

[grindin griers]

Didn't the NHL put the offer they pulled back on the table? Pulling that offer was all just talk, I don't think anyone truly believed it was really gone.

Currently there is really no offer on the table from either side. From what I heard (from Darren Dreger on Twitter) is that the $300 mil of make whole is gone, and that the $211 is in jeopardy.

Darren Dreger ‏@DarrenDreger
@mirtle. Right, but teams insist $300 mil is gone and $211 is in serious question.

[Jason_Banks]

I could be wrong, but I thought a 'disclaimer of interest' was a necessary step towards decertifying.

This is true, it is the first step in a process that will take months to work out. (as stated by others killing the season)

Not all the players would be UFAs, Any player under contract is still binded by the contract (thats why they are decertifying so that they don't have to worry about the make whole for players already signed, problem solved)

Any RFA would be a UFA, Any player drafted whose rights are owned but unsigned would be a UFA, and the Draft is a CBA entity and would no longer exist, thust any undrated player meaning Nathan McKinnon, would be a UFA at the time they are able to legally sign a working contract (which is either 16 or 18 in canada)...

This also means no cap or upper level for contracts, but also means no lower level for contracts... UFAs can be signed for 15 million... or 60K...

Also no escrow battles, as it wont exist...

After that the process cycles, eventually the players and lg will still negotiate a new CBA without being under the umbrella of a union, and once agreed they will reform the NHLPA again re-setting everything...

But this kills everything the lg has established for itself interms of how it operated with its products (players) and makes them have to rewrite a whole new book... (that will be simlier to the old)...

For the players it is freedom and open market, with no rights, arbitration or rules on where they can sign or how to transfer over... This also effects the transfer agreements with Major Junior and KHL...

The NHL owners loose more control, potentially $$$ and gain more headaches from the NHLPA Disbandment, that the players...

[Godin]

If I wanted to learn about 'union decertification' and 'disclaimer of interest', I would of gone to law school and majored in labour law, but I don't really give a crap because it doesn't concern me as i'm sure it doesn't most of you.

I just can't believe what we are talking about. Educational, maybe, but not what hockey fans should be talking about in December, or anytime for that matter.

Is it a bluff? yeah probably, and how did that work out in the '04-'05 dispute? There was a lot of bluffing going on then also, and they're back at it again.

This is going to the season drop dead date because neither side is budging. I know its not that simple but, it is definitley not as complicated as they are making it out to be. Lets face it, its going to end up somewhere between 5 and 10 years for contracts and what, 8 to 10 years for the CBA? I know 5-10 years is a big gap, but this is where the players are wrong. You can't guarantee consistency for 2 years, and you want 8 or 10 year contracts? As far as the CBA is concerned, give the advantage to the players. There has to be some give and take in these negotiations and not just take, ala the owners. The mediators they brought in probably left the meetings shaking their heads asking if these guys were for real.

For the sake of the fans, cut the crap and get it done. There you go, another topic for the NHL and the NHLPA to argue over, the fans.

[fulcrum]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=411653

[Carcillo]

What proposal? It was all pulled off the table last week in fit of theatrical rage. Maybe, maybe by the end of next week the NHL will come back to the table with some elements of the last offer but not before they sweat the players and try to break them one last time before Christmas.

I believe Daly said a few days ago that NHL would love to submit a proposal for the PA to vote.

[arctic_rogue]

This is absolutely painful. There is so much mis-information and spin out there, it's hard to make sense of everything. Either way, the NHL and PA need to get their acts together. If they don't, I know one person who won't be following any hockey when if it doesn't resume until next season.

[Loch]

It's like watching two ******ed squirrels fight over a single nut while an entire field of nuts rots on the ground around them...

[arctic_rogue]

It's like watching two ******ed squirrels fight over a single nut while an entire field of nuts rots on the ground around them...

Best.analogy.ever.

Period.