Nhlpa given authority to file disclaimer of interest

[Kessel50]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=412078

[His Dudeness]

Oh joy, oh rapture

[NoWayOut]

Originally Posted by His Dudeness

Oh joy, oh rapture

Oh shit

Here come the lawsuits, and there goes the last shred of hope for a season. Maybe we can start an NHL fantasy lawyer league.

[arctic_rogue]

At least it would be fantasy something...

Either way, we're on the last stretch here. It either helps or it doesn't, but either way it'll be somewhat interesting. Honestly, I'm tired of the rhetoric from both sides with these "negotiations".

[fantasyhockeygeek]

This is so funny to me. A disclaimer of interest is the union leadership (ie not members) legally saying "I can't represent these clowns anymore". It's kinda like a breakup.

So... the union has just voted to give their executive committee the ability to tell their leadership to break up with them.

This is the equivalent of a woman asking her boyfriend to ask his friends if she should break up with him. They come back with "yup, dump him if you need to", then her boyfriend might come back with "ok, dump me if you've gotta".

For fricks sake, what a circus.

[One87]

Originally Posted by fantasyhockeygeek

This is so funny to me. A disclaimer of interest is the union leadership (ie not members) legally saying "I can't represent these clowns anymore". It's kinda like a breakup.

So... the union has just voted to give their executive committee the ability to tell their leadership to break up with them.

This is the equivalent of a woman asking her boyfriend to ask his friends if she should break up with him. They come back with "yup, dump him if you need to", then her boyfriend might come back with "ok, dump me if you've gotta".

For fricks sake, what a circus.

Well said, sir. And definitely rep worthy. LOL.

[VincentVega]

Originally Posted by fantasyhockeygeek

This is so funny to me. A disclaimer of interest is the union leadership (ie not members) legally saying "I can't represent these clowns anymore". It's kinda like a breakup.

So... the union has just voted to give their executive committee the ability to tell their leadership to break up with them.

This is the equivalent of a woman asking her boyfriend to ask his friends if she should break up with him. They come back with "yup, dump him if you need to", then her boyfriend might come back with "ok, dump me if you've gotta".

For fricks sake, what a circus.

Isn't Fehr just following what the NBA did last year? They filed for disclaimer and 10 days or so later, there was an agreement. Fehr is known for waiting till the last possible moment to make a deal and this is just one of the tools in his tool belt.

[fantasyhockeygeek]

Sure, he's doing what the NBA players did but that doesn't make it any less ridiculous.

The intent of the labour law that underpins a Disclaimer of Interest says that it's more-or-less akin to the union's leadership saying "I can't represent you guys anymore. Irreconcilable differences, so I'm dumping you."

Voting on whether to have someone dump you is a farce! The intent is that it's a 1-way street.

What a circus!

[ericdaoust]

I would like to offer my disclaimer of non-interest to the CBA talks.

[Skin Blues]

Originally Posted by fantasyhockeygeek

Sure, he's doing what the NBA players did but that doesn't make it any less ridiculous.

The intent of the labour law that underpins a Disclaimer of Interest says that it's more-or-less akin to the union's leadership saying "I can't represent you guys anymore. Irreconcilable differences, so I'm dumping you."

Voting on whether to have someone dump you is a farce! The intent is that it's a 1-way street.

What a circus!

It's not a circus at all, it's a legal loophole. The world is full of them, and it's in everybody's individual best interest to exploit any loophole available to them.

It's essentially just the players saying "we don't want to bargain as a group. We want to be unrepresented so that we can file anti-trust lawsuits and inevitably when the league legally needs us to join back together as a union and be represented by you again in order to avoid these lawsuits, we'll have more leverage".

It's not like the boyfriend example at all. It's like saying to your wife... "My company is filing bankruptcy, but if we get divorced then you can keep half of our money safe from creditors. We'll still live together, but we're technically not married anymore."