I repeat my suggestion to settle NFL dispute

[louis c]

Let's remember, you try to settle a dispute when you have the most leverage.

If the linked is agreed to, the players can claim victory. After all, this protest is not about the flag or the anthem. It's to bring awareness to a problem.

My suggested settlement certainly brings awareness to the problem, by the employer (the NFL).

After all, the NFL does not have the power to solve the problem of equality in this country, only to heighten the awareness of the problem. This proposed settlement does that.


Repeat of Previous post:

I negotiate Union contracts for a living. here's my suggestion to settle the NFL dispute.

Reduce this problem to a labor-management negotiation. It is legal, under labor law, to negotiate a new work rule between the parties.

The players will be obliged to stand for the National Anthem for each game (the NBA has this work rule in effect currently, so it can be mandated by an agreement).

In return, the NFL agrees:

(1). To make a "good faith effort" to employ Colin Kapinack this season.

(2). To dedicate one week a season to Equality Awareness. The League will commit $100 Million dollars (Edit: or other mutually agreed upon sum: end Edit) to charities that help in this awareness. The charities will be chosen by the parties (NFL and NFLPA).

(3). That one week a year (in 2017, it will be the week that Miami and Tampa play, which means there are no bye teams), the Battle Hymn of the Republic will be sung before each game that week, prior to the National Anthem. The American Flag will be a replica of the flag fought under by the Union Soldiers during the Civil War.

(4). The NFL, at its own expense, will run at least two public service, 30 second commercials during each game (Edit: in the entire season End edit), approved by the union, promoting equality in the United States.

Link;

[stopbush]

1. Still a very bad proposal that rides roughshod over the rights of the players.

Your idea was pretty much shot down the first time. What makes you think it will fare any better this time around?

[louis c]

6. We're losing leverage, not gaining

We can stand fast and end up eating shit, or get a good agreement and declare victory.

they'll be meeting this week with the players and owners. you can bet you life they will agree to something with far less accomplished from our side than this.

You can rest assured the final arbiter will not be DU.

If all we had to do was convince a majority on this site, we could get a hell of a deal. The problem is, the players are dealing with a lot more than the opinions here.

when I am at an employees caucus, there are always those who want the entire pie during negotiations. The problem is, there are two sides to a negotiation.

[stopbush]

8. Watching NFL TV commentary shows this morning and that just isnt true.

In fact, the players’ position is the position being championed. They are also pointing out that tRump lied when he said Goddell had come aroundto tRump’s view, pointing out that the owners and players issued a joint statement saying that was not true.

The longer the players stick by their guns, the MORE public support they will garner. Fans who like tRump will pout for a few weeks, but as the season wears on - and as their team sports a winning record - they will be back in front of their TVs, saying they’re over it.

[louis c]

13. I hate to quote the Moron in Cheif, but we'll see

[stopbush]

16. What you fail to consider in your proposal

is the fact that the NFL players are the PRODUCT.

This isn’t a negotiation among employers and employees at a widget factory. Every single player belongs to the union. They have 100% strength in numbers and the knowledge that the replacement player approach the NFL took years ago was a disaster for the NFL.

What’s more, the players have the leverage of the ongoing concussion issue to work with. Do you really think the owners want to reopen contract negotiations with that potential game wrecker hanging over their league?

[DK504]

19. The game is the product, not men.

Jerry Jones thinks they are HIS property. They are men with the right to protest. The Moron using Twitter is a tool that needs to be neutralized. The players union need to come out hard and stiff arm the Moron back on to his ass. He is wrong, any one with a brain know that. Problem is, the white people have no clue what it is like to walk in a minorities shoes.

We need to show what it really like. Pinhole and button cameras, let's see how they are treated when no one knows who they are. Let's see what it's like for these guys to drive in a city they don't play the game in, NFL, NBA, Baseball, see how this works. Let's show the white world what it is really like.

[stopbush]

20. Nope. The game is a commodity. The players are the product that raises the NFL

to being a brand, not just a commodity. It’s the same with all professional sports. The players - including past players from decades ago - are marketed as what has made and continues to make the game unique. Otherwise, the marketing would focus on rule changes over the years, design of the stadiums, etc.

Trust me, I’m a marketing guy.

[louis c]

21. They are exactly the same as any employee in a service contract

If the NFL orders them to stand for the anthem, they'll have to stand or risk discipline.

This week, the player reps and the owners will meet with the Commissioner.

If the players come away with an agreement close to what I outlined, they'll be lucky.

[stopbush]

23. As unionized employees, they can strike. Thats the ultimate power

they have to use against the owners. At that point, the owners need to decide if any “discipline” they impose to deal with a strike helps or hurts their bottom line. Considering the NFL is mid-season with the entire playoff season and the Super Bowl hanging in the balance, the owners will avoid a strike at all costs.

The potential for lost revenue over kneeling for the anthem pales in comparison to what would be lost through a players strike.

[louis c]

24. They can only "strike" once the contract expires

All Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA's) have a no strike/no lockout clause. After all, that's the whole reason for an employer to have a CBA.

All other violations or disputes go through the grievance and arbitration provision of the contract.

If the NFL, under the management rights' clause, makes its anthem policy a work rule and enforces it by suspending or terminating a player (employee) for not adhering to it, the NFLPA can grieve, and then arbitrate that finding.

The NFL's CBA has a weird arbitration process in which Goodell is the final verdict. It is the only union contract I have ever seen that the arbitrator is other than a third party. This provision, as absurd as it is in union law, has been upheld twice in court. Once in the Brady case and the other, just recently, in the Elliott case (Cowboys).

The NFL contract is all in the hands of the owners. but, the owners do want to get out of this mess with as little acrimony as possible. They have a predominately African-American workforce and customers who are predominantly in the demographic that favors bigotry (Trump voters, older, mostly white males).

What I have proposed is a way out for everyone. This taking a knee protest is over a year old. The players did not overwhelmingly join this cause until the fucking moron in the white house made it a center stage issue. What I have proposed allows the players to elevate this cause to the public's view, put the NFL on the side of justice, the players (and we) can declare victory, and continue the fight for social justice by trying to persuade our fellow citizens that equality is an American value.

I work at resolving disputes, not playing all or nothing with peoples' careers. You can bet that a suggestion close to what I have posted here is being discussed for presentation at the meetings called on this issue.

[demmiblue]

2. Your link doesn't work.

Personally, I think the players should do whatever their hearts and consciences tell them to do. I support them 100%.

[demmiblue]

5. Saw your edit, and still a no (more like a fuck no).

[louis c]

7. Rest assured

Our side will end up with a worst deal, or nothing, in the end.

Of course, it's always a lot easier to negotiate with other peoples' money and jobs.

I'm trying to look at it as if I was representing the players, not DU.

[Not Ruth]

3. My idea is to find something more productive than watching football

Learn a language, volunteer at a shelter, make art

[FBaggins]

4. The mistake here is that this isn't labor against management

And the players don't have leverage.

The players are in no sense united and their compensation is directly linked to league revenues, so they're just as worried about lost revenues as the owners are.

Lastly - Kaepernick would have no trouble getting a job if he adjust his ask closer to what he's worth.

[Not Ruth]

9. How much is Kaepernick's salary worth?

[Brother Buzz]

14. He's worth what the market will pay....

and that's a little less than half of what he was making when he and the the Forty-Niners divorced. On a good day, he could snag $5 million, down from $13 million.

[FBaggins]

15. Dramatically less than he seems to think he's worth

There are a handful of teams that run a similar enough offense that he could make a decent veteran backup. Call it 3-4 million before some incentives in the event the starter goes down and he plays well in relief.

[louis c]

11. If management (NFL) makes a work rule requiring the players (NFLPA) to stand for the Anthem

it is a labor dispute.

both sides want to settle this. 48% of the revenue belongs to the players, and the revenue is down 8% this year.

It's always easier to sit on the sidelines (excuse the pun) and tell somebody else to sacrifice, but it's a quite different when you're in the fight.

I'm placing myself as the players union rep. As I said, I do represent workers for a living and negotiate Collective Bargaining Agreements, handle grievances and arbitrations, settle workplace disputes, and work on legislation concerning workers' rights. As a matter of fact, I sat in on the negotiations for maintenance workers at Gillette Stadium in Foxboro two rears ago (Area Trade Council).

I feel this solves the problem between the parties (not the social problem that extends back 400 years), while the players make their point, the NFL brings greater awareness to the issue, and our side can declare victory.

Time is not on our side.

[FBaggins]

17. They don't have to change a rule

Their existing contract reads "conduct himself on and off the field with appropriate recognition of the fact that the success of professional football depends largely on public respect for and approval of those associated with the game."

You just admitted that the current behavior mix is hurting the success of professional football.

Your plan isn't a settlement, because it doesn't actually settle anything. All of the money being spent, or forgone, on advertising is essentially split 50-50 with the players. If the players were willing to spend eight figures for the point they're trying to make… They would just spend it. Taking a knee doesn't cost anything.

In my opinion, the solution is for the league to find a way for players to make the statement that they oppose discrimination… Without doing it in a way that offends the NFL's base.

[louis c]

18. Exactly. however, it's a policy and not a workrule. The NFL would have to declare a "rule'

The employer can force the rule. There is no "first amendment right" in employment. It's up to the employer.

But the NFL doesn't want to alienate a vast number of its employees (players) by just imposing this rule.

The agreed to sum may be less than the $100 million a year, it may only be 10, that's what negotiating is all about.

Maybe the Battle Hymn will only be sung at a Redskins game, and broadcast to other stadiums.

but I'll bet you dollars to donuts that this agreement, or one like it, would be passed by a majority of owners and players.

They're looking for a settlement and you'll see something like this come out of this week's meeting, certainly before Dallas takes the field again.

[shockey80]

10. I have a better idea.

The players should tell the owners and Trump to go fuck themselves.

[louis c]

12. And quit their jobs?

are you willing to quit yours in solidarity?

[stopbush]

22. As long as the owners continue to put on pre-game spectaclesthat are funded

by government monies, they have created a First Amendment issue, as the owners are acting in concert with the goverment. They are in effect agents of the government.

Any rule they try to pass that limits the players right to free speech is a violation of the First Amendment. Were the owners - not the government - paying for the pre-game spectacle this would not be a First Amendment issue.