CFL/CFLPA Labour Negotiations -- Deal reached

[Shi Zi Mi]

The strength of any union is it's solidarity within the membership......Harris' words erodes that solidarity and weakens the union's position significantly......and you can be sure the league executive are smiling from ear to ear upon hearing Harris' interview.

I don't know. I think everyone knows the union party line, along with the fact that their opening position is untenable. Everyone also knows that this dance is entirely predictable and, at least to me, somewhat boring. Management says "we can't afford it;" union says "we demand what we're asking for." Ho hum. Any player saying that the union position is entirely justified and management's is completely unreasonable is simply written off as a union stooge, who likely doesn't believe half of what he's saying. So I don't see Harris's comments as weakening the PA's position or, for that matter, as having any effect one way or the other on the outcome of this impasse. I do see his comments, though, as a refreshing change from the usual boilerplate, and I applaud him for his honesty and realistic perspective. In a sort of perverse and ironic way, I think his views may put the players in a more favorable light in the ongoing to'ing and fro'ing. He did say, after all, that a compromise position would be best, which means he's not saying that the players should just accept what the league is offering. This is just common sense, and is the way most labor conflicts are eventually resolved.

What anyone believes or knows or opines is irrelevant......what the public thinks of his comments is irrelevant. What is relevant is how the league reacts to this break in solidarity. What is relevant is how his union brothers react to his comments. Cracks in the foundation of the union will be seen as weakness in the ranks and could affect the league's next offer. If the league had been preparing to "up the ante" in order to get a deal done, this may convince them that they don't have to......union busting at it's finest.

[Blue In BC]

I don't think not having a TC is a workable situation if there is a work stoppage or delay. There has to be a TC in order to decide who makes the roster and to get physically and mentally prepared to play. Ditto for pre season games which goes hand and hand with TC.

It may result in a compressed schedule which wouldn't be good but I can't see a shortened game schedule either which puts money in the pockets of players and owners.

Strikes are a lose lose for all involved. Negotiate a new deal that makes sense.

[South Pender]

What anyone believes or knows or opines is irrelevant......what the public thinks of his comments is irrelevant. What is relevant is how the league reacts to this break in solidarity. What is relevant is how his union brothers react to his comments. Cracks in the foundation of the union will be seen as weakness in the ranks and could affect the league's next offer. If the league had been preparing to "up the ante" in order to get a deal done, this may convince them that they don't have to......union busting at it's finest.

Although I've never been directly affected in my work by a labor dispute or the possibility of a strike (so am not an expert on the battle strategies involved), I think the players' beliefs about how it should be settled is relevant, and so too is how the public receives Harris's comments. These comments will be received as reasonable and practical and will, I believe, provide some support for the players. As for his union brothers, my guess is that most of them feel the same way (but I could be wrong about that) and would like to see the process play out the way Harris described (reaching a compromise position and soon, so that TC and the season can proceed without damaging alterations). But don't you think that, when it comes right down to it, Harris's comments will fade into irrelevance once the strike vote is obtained? If the vote produces a very high majority of players backing a strike, as McCallum has stated (although I suspect his comments are little more than union flackery), then the league will know that it may well have to up the ante. If the strike vote produces only mild support for a strike, then Harris's comments will be seen to have merely been a harbinger of union sentiment, and we'll probably have a settlement close to what the league has offered. Either way, it seems to me, Harris's comments will ultimately be irrelevant with respect to how the impasse is settled.

[Blue In BC]

A strike vote is a tool unions use during negotiations. It doesn't automatically determine the need to follow through with a strike.

Let's jsut hope calmer heads prevail and they go to the bargaining table while TC is under way. It's what we've seen in many other union situations across the country.

I did work as a union member for about 20 years and many times the union voted for a strike. IIRC there were a few short work stoppages but generally contracts were resolved. On the " real downside " there were death threats to some union members and damage to union member property by other union members ( scary to say the least ). Tempers can run high and that's not a good thing.

[WestCoastJoe]

SCIANITTI: REDBLACKS' POTTINGER "INSULTED" BY CFL OFFER
Matthew Scianitti
5/21/2014 8:13:06 PM

Jason Pottinger chose his words carefully, because this was the first time he could speak for himself, on the record. And the Ottawa Redblacks linebacker wanted to be sure his words delivered their full effect.

"It's an insult," he said over the phone Wednesday after the CFL Players Association lifted its media ban, giving its members the ability to speak openly about stalling collective bargaining talks.

For Pottinger — 30 years old and an eight-year CFL veteran taken by Ottawa in December's expansion draft— "It," is an all-composing term, referring to the CFL's reluctance to explore any revenue-sharing model, and the publication of the league's newest offer Wednesday, which includes a "ratification bonus" ($1,000 for rookies and $3,000 for veterans) if the players agree to the league's terms by June 2.

"It's a slap in the face."

"It" ultimately alludes to a negotiation process that has made no progress for months. Like most players, Pottinger has not directly been part of the talks. There is now a week left before the current CBA expires on May 29.

Last week the CFLPA began mailing out strike ballots to its members. Pottinger has received his, and he has voted 'Yes.'

"I'm hopeful," he said. "But the league has to start taking us seriously."

For the most part, players have kept quiet over the last few months. The CFL made certain no one representing the league or any team spoke, threatening hefty fines for any league or team official willing to share any thoughts on the negotiations. And then today - after TSN initially reported the league's latest offer to the players - CFL commissioner Mark Cohon released the offer on the league's website along with an open letter to players and fans.

The league's offer includes an initial nine per cent increase on the salary cap — from the existing $4.4 million to $4.8 million — in the first year of a new CBA, and a yearly $50,000 increase over the life of a new five-year deal (putting the cap at $5,050,000). The league minimum salary would also be raised from $45,000 to $50,000. And the CFL would maintain a $450,000 annual payment to the CFLPA for "Player marketing and other rights."

The proposal also includes larger active rosters, plans for limited amounts of contact practices, and the continuation of player pension, medical, and life insurance benefits.

"The CFL offer strikes an appropriate balance of, on the one hand, providing significant compensation increases and health and safety improvements to the Players while, on the other hand, creating an environment in which the League and its teams can continue to build for a strong and stable future," Cohon wrote in his letter to the players.

"I was surprised [the league went public]," Pottinger said. "This must have been their plan. We had an understanding that neither side would approach the media for 24 hours. [The players] gave that notice [Tuesday afternoon] and the league broke that understanding. They came in [to the proposed Toronto meeting place Wednesday] handed their proposal and walked out. Now is that bargaining?"

Four hours later, CFLPA executives held a press conference and released their counterproposal. The crucial component of the players' offer is $6.24 million salary cap partly determined by a revenue-sharing model, which would allocate 55 per cent of gross revenue from TV, internet and radio rights, 45 per cent of gross sponsorship revenue, and 40 per cent of gross ticket revenue to the players.

"We advised the CFLPA in no uncertain terms that their proposal was not realistic, and would not form the basis for any financial settlement," Cohon said in his letter. "In fact, it would threaten the very existence of the CFL."

"The league has only recently been upfront with us about their finances," Pottinger said. "This isn't just about the players now. This is about the players who are coming into the league, and who will come into the league. In five years, I will likely be out of the league. I want players coming to the CFL then to say 'Thanks for putting up a fight.'

CFLPA president Scott Flory also issued a letter to CFL fans Wednesday afternoon. "We are in not interested in destroying the game that has given us all so much. We put our bodies, hearts and souls on the line and seek nothing more than to be fairly paid for what we do," Flory wrote.

Sources - players both close to the negotiations and outside of the meetings - have told TSN over the past few months that some kind of revenue-sharing scheme must be an integral part of any new CBA. But are the percentages in the CFLPA's recent proposal fixed, immutable numbers? Or a starting point that hasn't yet been properly considered?

Pottinger, a businessman himself working toward his Master of Business Administration, paused when considering the questions. The terms "what's fair" and "fair share" were constantly repeated principles when players were advised to say little or nothing. The message won't change now.

"In the end - and I know you've heard this enough times already - but we want what's fair," he said.

"I want you to write this: Back in 2010 [when the soon-to-be-expired CBA was being negotiated] revenue sharing for the players was around 56 per cent. The league approached us and said they couldn't operate with a revenue sharing model. They told us the league wouldn't be healthy. They told us to be partners. We understood. We thought we were partners."

"Now it just feels like take, take, take."

Players used social media to air frustration and show their filled-in strike ballots. Ones with 'NO' crossed have yet to be seen. "In writing this letter, we the Executive, are still here where our negotiations were scheduled to be, working towards furthering talks. We need two sides," Flory wrote in his open letter.

What is the timetable now? Does Pottinger expect to miss the first week of training camp? The first preseason game? The first week of the regular season? Is he ready to strike?

"I'm still hopeful for a new deal," Pottinger said.

[South Pender]

I don't think not having a TC is a workable situation if there is a work stoppage or delay. There has to be a TC in order to decide who makes the roster and to get physically and mentally prepared to play. Ditto for pre season games which goes hand and hand with TC.

I agree that dispensing with or shortening TC and the preseason games would be the wrong way for the league to handle a work stoppage and delay until a settlement is reached. As Blue In BC notes, TC is essential for a number of reasons, one of which would be the potential health risks later in the season that might result from insufficient conditioning and physical preparation before the regular season that would accompany any pre-season reduction. So, in my view, TC and the two pre-season games should be maintained. Compression of the 18 games would also be a big mistake in my view, since, as things are, there are already many weeks with only 4 or 5 days between games. Reducing the time between games would likely result in a higher injury rate--too high a price to pay for retaining the 18-game schedule. I think that the correct policy in the event that the season is set back by X weeks is to retain TC and the 2-game pre-season and reduce the number of regular-season games accordingly so as to retain the time between games.

[WestCoastJoe]

As I indicated earlier, I will be surprised if there is a strike.

IMO the players have more to lose than the owners. The pro athletes get to play the game they love for six months, for what would be considered good pay by most of the population. Star treatment. Fans. Opportunities to build post playing careers. They willingly put their bodies at risk.

It seems to me the owners in the CFL have not been in it for financial gain. More for love of the game. A pro sports team is the ultimate guy's toy, but the joy of ownership can be killed by the balance sheet, by losing year after year, by labour strife, by red tape, etc. It is not as if the CFL has had the luxury of a lineup of deep pocketed, would be owners lined up to bid on a franchise. At what point does Bob Young lose interest? When does David Braley divest himself of the teams he rescued?

The CFL has a chance to grow a bit, to solidify. A strike would nip that in the bud.

It seems to me the TSN TV deal has given rise to some unrealistic expectations.

[South Pender]

As I indicated earlier, I will be surprised if there is a strike.

IMO the players have more to lose than the owners. The pro athletes get to play the game they love for six months, for what would be considered good pay by most of the population. Star treatment. Fans. Opportunities to build post playing careers. They willingly put their bodies at risk.

It seems to me the owners in the CFL have not been in it for financial gain. More for love of the game. A pro sports team is the ultimate guy's toy, but the joy of ownership can be killed by the balance sheet, by losing year after year, by labour strife, by red tape, etc. It is not as if the CFL has had the luxury of a lineup of deep pocketed, would be owners lined up to bid on a franchise. At what point does Bob Young lose interest? When does David Braley divest himself of the teams he rescued?

The CFL has a chance to grow a bit, to solidify. A strike would nip that in the bud.

It seems to me the TSN TV deal has given rise to some unrealistic expectations.

I agree. I was disappointed to see Pottinger launching the brickbats. Of course, it's not unusual to see this accusing the other side of malfeasance in labor disputes, but, for once, it would be nice to see members of each side show some class and focus on problem-solving. The union won't get their $6.24M salary cap, but they may well be able to increase the $4.8M league offer. It would be nice to see some real urgency displayed by both sides, with daily meetings if necessary, and a reasonable compromise worked out so that both sides have some sense of success in the process. As you say, WCJ, a strike would be very damaging.

[WestCoastJoe]

Do the players expect full pay for a shortened season?

Do they expect free room and board at TC if they bring a work stoppage during Camp?

It gets messy ...

Unrealistic expectations ... That is when people go all in. Pie in the sky. Rich owners. Big TV deal. Cash in. Get insulted at a 12% offer, with a $3000 bonus. Hey, I am worth more than that. I put my body at risk. I work out all year. Yes, and some people hold down two or more jobs to support their family.

If there is a work stoppage at TC (I would call that all in), what if the owners give up and say: Go home. Pay your own way. Rooms and food are cancelled. Now who is insulted?

Worse step ... Replacement players. It can get ugly fast.

My point is that the ownership group has limitations on their tolerance, in a situation where they are not really in it for the money. Is David Braley in it for the money? Is Bob Young? Some would say they have foolish obsessions with their football owenrship, losing money for years.

Yes, I do see the dark side. But I am basically optimistic by nature.

[Shi Zi Mi]

Arash Madani ‏@ArashMadani 13m

The CFLPA announces negotiations are back on with the #CFL. Talks are set to resume Wednesday in Toronto.

David William Naylor ‏@TSNDaveNaylor 2m

CFLPA has reached out to league to resume CBA bargaining for Wednesday, May 28th. #cfl #cflpla

[Shi Zi Mi]

Looks like the CFLPA know they're hooped.....initiate "salvage mode".

[MikeAK]

I agree with what most of you Gents have talked about in here. It is also good to hear the CFLPA have reached out. Maybe they have been reading this thread?...lol.

Either way, hopefully the players have had internal talks and realize their expectations, as well as comparisons with other leagues(NFL), were grossly out of touch with the reality of the CFL.

Looking forward to a cold beer and some CFL.

[DanoT]

IMO, all that is needed to get a deal should be the CFLPA dropping the demand for revenue sharing, and the CFL upping the cap by another $100k or $200k or ??

The CFLPA has been very unrealistic in trying to use the NFL as a model for their CBA when the finances of the 2 leagues are worlds apart. OTOH it is a real credit to the CFL players and coaches that with such a shoe string budget the play on the field is far closer in caliber than the 2 leagues business models would suggest.

[South Pender]

The CFLPA's reaching out to the league doesn't, of course, necessarily mean that they are caving. However, I wonder whether they've seen the results of their player survey and realize that the rank-and-file don't want a strike and want to get going with the season.

[ballhawk]

A major problem in our society is that during the last 2 decades or so the tables have been turned such that executives, coaches and so forth are getting the big bucks and the players who are actually performing and have the athletic skill are being paid less and receiving mediocre care and benefits . The CFL has become an executive and coaches league - a cash cow for them at the expense of the players. No players playing means no more big bucks for the execs - just their golden parachutes. The players do have clout - the executives and coaches don't want to lose their overpaid salaries!

But this is happening and has happened now for some time in all the major North American leagues. A major revolution is required, but unfortunately I don't thing the CFL players are in a position to initiate the coup, although I admire these players very, very much.

I recommend all posters on this forum read Gregg Easterbrook's book, The King of Sports: Football's Impact on America, a must read book for football enthusiasts. It paints a bleak picture of football, and I agree wih Mr. Easterbrook on every provocative point he brings up - the latest being the scandal (including addiction ) to painkilling drugs and other remedies by teams. In one sense, we are lucky to be in Canada and have the CFL.