Content provided in partnership with

A different kind of faceoff: instead of dropping the puck, the league and its players are prepared for a long labor standoff and are peppering legal slap shots back and forth

Sporting News, The, Sept 20, 2004 by Kara Yorio

When the NHL and the NHL Players' Association came out of a four-hour meeting last week, it was difficult to believe they, had been in the same room, looking at the same proposal from the players, searching for a way to save the season. In the end, commissioner Gary Bettman is said to have told the association, "We're not even speaking the same language."

There is one word they will both know: lockout. It'll translate into languages around the world. The collective bargaining agreement was to expire at midnight Wednesday, and the result was all but certain: The 2004-05 season would not start.

Most Popular Articles in Sports: The first family: Archie, Peyton and Eli are incredibly famous, immensely ...; The growing gap: driving distances are skyrocketing on the PGA Tour. So why ...; Which pistol caliber for self defense? Four different people come to four ...; Drag racing - National Hot Rod Association; The world's most popular .22: the Marlin Model 60 just keeps on ticking; More »

The standoff hinges on one issue: whether there will be a salary cap. Once an agreement on that is reached--and there is no indication that agreement will be made any time soon--the two sides will need to negotiate many other matters, including arbitration, entry-level contracts, free agents, the length of training camp and the regular season and the players' involvement in rules changes.

The league has been unwilling to accept anything other than a cap, though it won't admit it's proposing a cap. In the league's words, it wants a specific, locked-in percentage of revenue for salaries. That's a cap.

"Players will never accept a salary cap," NHLPA president Trevor Linden says.

So let's play this out. What if the two sides--so incredibly far apart philosophically and so dug into their stances--continue to hold their ground?

The result will be an impasse.

An impasse, in labor terms, is when both sides have exhausted negotiations on all issues and are unwilling to compromise in any way. The league would have to initiate the procedure to declare an impasse. Once that happens, the league can implement its most recent proposal. According to Bill Daly, NHL executive vice president and chief legal officer, Bettman has the power to do that through a Board of Governors resolution.

So what are the ramifications if such a thing happens?

"The practical impact of an impasse here is no hockey this year," says Ron Holland, a labor attorney for Littler Mendelson in San Francisco.

Minnesota attorney Clark Griffith, chair of the American Bar Association's Sports Division and son of former Twins owner Calvin Griffith, disagrees.

"If they find themselves at an impasse, they'll try to put a plan in place," Griffith says of the league.

If that happens, the union no doubt will argue the legality of such a move. According to Griffith, an impasse cannot be reached if the union continues to show movement. Also, the Players' Association might bring Canadian law into the discussion because, Griffith says, Canadian labor laws typically favor unions.

If the NHL puts a plan in place, the players can accept it while arguing the legality of the NHL's move in court or not accept it and go on strike.

Either way, it'll be a battle.

"I would suggest we're already at an impasse," Daly said last week. That's not a legal declaration, just one man's opinion, but it is a glimpse into where this is going.

Don't expect much to happen for a while. The league needs more time to show its intention to negotiate with the union--it is illegal to plan for an impasse.

The salary cap semantics were bad enough. Next, it'll be labor law terminology. It's ugly, and it could mean no NHL games for the foreseeable future.

Agreeing to disagree

What has happened

* The Players' Association twice has made a proposal that included a 5 percent cut in salaries across the board, a luxury tax and revenue sharing. It was a huge gesture for the players to offer to take a cut in salary, but how big of a gesture was it, really, if they knew the other side wouldn't accept it?

* The NHL offered six proposals it called "creative" ways of dealing with the problems. According to the Players' Association, each one included a salary cap in some form, and the union rejected all of them. Again, the same question is raised: How creative is the league being if it knows the union won't accept the basic premise of any of the proposals?

* None of the proposals reached a true negotiating stage, failing to get past the major issue: whether there will be a salary cap.

The roadblocks

* Philosophical disagreement.

* A lack of trust between the sides.

* The idea, seemingly on both sides, that a lengthy lockout would force the other side to crumble.--K.Y

A different kind of faceoff: instead of dropping the puck, the league and its players are prepared for a long labor standoff and are peppering legal slap shots back and forth

Sporting News, The, Sept 20, 2004 by Kara Yorio

Find Research Guides for:

Find Featured Titles for: Home & Garden

Most Popular Articles in Sports

Most Popular Publications in Sports