Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

In case you missed it: NFLPA Head, Smith, wants to permanently decertify the NFL players' union

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Godhumor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-11 11:51 AM
Original message
In case you missed it: NFLPA Head, Smith, wants to permanently decertify the NFL players' union
From May 27th:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-silver_nflpa_could_stay_permanently_decetified_052711

Back in March of 2009, when he was elected to succeed the late Gene Upshaw as the NFL Players Association’s executive director, DeMaurice Smith considered himself the ultimate union man.

Two years later, when Smith announced that the NFLPA would decertify and become a trade association after negotiations with league owners on a new collective bargaining agreement broke down, most people assumed that this was a temporary tactical maneuver designed to allow players to seek leverage through the legal system. The NFL has enunciated this argument in a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, charging that the NFLPA’s move to decertify and become a trade association was a sham.

Smith, however, insists that he has embraced decertification as an enduring state of existence, much in the same way that Upshaw did in the early ’90s before – at the NFL’s insistence – he agreed to re-form the union. In an interview with Y! Sports earlier this month, Smith revealed that he envisions navigating the NFLPA through a union-free future, even after a possible settlement of the Brady et al antitrust lawsuit and a new contractual agreement between players and owners.

“I’ve come full circle,” Smith said as he sat in a downtown Bethesda plaza, a few miles from the NFLPA’s Washington D.C. headquarters, on a sunny spring morning. “When I went into this, my attitude was that the only way you have power is collectively, and I believed in unions as vehicles for employees asserting their rights. But looking back on what Gene experienced and understanding this particular situation, I’ve now come to appreciate the value of decertification in our particular circumstance. And I don’t see why we’d want to go back to being a union.”

--------------

It is thought that not having a union would allow players more power in anti-trust issues, and, oddly enough, the owners will insist that players reform the union after the labor stoppage is settled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-11 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
1. The topic is a little more subtle that it seems on its face
NFL players may get a better collective deal by not having a formal union. That is not the same as abandoning collective efforts etc, but finding a more effective way given the unique set of circumstances of the NFL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Godhumor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-11 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I agree, as I was trying to point out in my follow-up sentence. It is a strange situation
Somehow I don't think this stoppage will be decided in the short-term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-11 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
3.  Professional sports are a unique structure with special laws and court decisions
There are those that will see the lack of a union as some sort of horrific evil, and ignore the very unique circumstances for the players. Even if there is a season, I quite agree that the labor/management issues will indeed be a long term issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-11 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
4. The distinction between union and trade association isn't obvious.
Witness the AMA, if ever there was a "union" which delivered the goods for the membership, it's the AMA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 10:55 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC