Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

Appeal ruling boils down to recognition of union

Posted on: May 21, 2011 1:41 pm
Edited on: May 21, 2011 3:50 pm
 
Posted by Will Brinson

The NFLPA filed their brief in the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals case just before midnight Friday, and led with a strong statement: "The NFL is a cartel."

But for as many zingers and strong language that exists in the brief, the argument that the panel of judges in St. Louis are really considering is this: "Are the players still a union?"

In their brief, the players argue that the NFL has not actually proven that the nonunionized players are arguing their case in the wrong place.

"The NFL does not cite any case that has ever held that disputes between employers and individualized nonunionized employees fall under the [Norris LaGuardia Act]," the players' attorneys wrote.

See, the Norris LaGuardia Act (NLGA) basically says that if there's a dispute between a employer and a group of employees in a union, that such a dispute needs to be resolved by the NLRB, and not by the court system.

So this -- "Are the players still a union?" -- is the dispute, legally speaking, that will decide whether or not we continue to have a lockout. If the Appeals Court believes/rules that the NFLPA truly disbanded, they'll lift the lockout. If they don't believe that, they'll leave the lockout in place, because, in their eyes, no court has jurisdiction over such a labor-related matter.

Here's the biggest problem, for those hoping the lockout will end: if the Appeals Court rules that the NFLPA broke up in good faith and is truly no longer a union (versus simply disbanding for legal leverage), they will establish a nightmarish precedent for themselves.
NFL Labor

Here's an example that may or may not simply be for the purpose of referencing The Wire, which is all the rage these days: If the Baltimore Union of the International Brotherhood of Stevedores decides it's being treated unfairly and wants to pursue litigation against its employer, Hypothetical Widget Shipping, Inc., it cannot dissolve the union, file a lawsuit and re-unionize later. At least not right now.

But it could -- potentially anyway -- do such a thing should the Appeals Court rule in favor of the players. (Edit: There is a difference between the status of sports leagues and other places of employ re: anti-trust status. But the point remains that the court would open itself up to a different interpretation of the law. Also, a better example could be: the NBA.)

This is problematic for the courts because it completely flips the jurisdiction of all labor disputes, if a union is willing to disband.

Remember, the Court of Appeals is pro-business; they're not "pro Roger Goodell." They don't care about this case in the sense of "How can we keep the players from winning?" They care about this case in the sense of "How does this effect future legal proceedings?"

Which is why it seems quite unlikely that the 8th Circuit will favor the players, regardless of how strong their arguments are.

Are there more issues? Yes. Are some of them stupidly complex? Absolutely.

But if you're going to boil the legal battle of the lockout down to one singular thing, it's whether or not a group of judges want to believe that the NFLPA has deunionized. Because of what they'd be setting themselves up for in the future, it's highly unlikely they'll rule that way.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
Comments

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: January 8, 2012 6:23 pm
 

Appeal ruling boils down to recognition of union

A person will collected the certainly productive webpage I've been effective correct looking into for as long as one particular. I'm a beginning and also your improvement is reasonably notably an actual touch an inspiration many people feel.



Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: January 8, 2012 3:08 pm
 

Appeal ruling boils down to recognition of union

Unique but only 50% the entire publish is almost certainly setting up to do. Is that this unquestionably the web-site and / or the best with the aid of the net cell phone browser. Must reactivate my personal using the web web browser?


fghdfre
Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: January 3, 2012 2:06 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator



hgtrerte
Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 3, 2011 10:41 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator



hgtrerte
Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 3, 2011 7:19 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator




Since: Jul 9, 2009
Posted on: May 24, 2011 1:16 am
 

Appeal ruling boils down to recognition of union

Eric and Hawk--Thanks for your careful responses to my comments.  Always helps to know just what we are saying and what we're not saying!



Since: Aug 21, 2006
Posted on: May 23, 2011 5:12 pm
 

Appeal ruling boils down to recognition of union

@argo444    I agree with you that this will not come down to whether the players are employees or independent contractors.  I was just making a point to @antz because he was being very adamant and disrespectful in trying to make his point that the players are independent contractors.




Since: Jan 26, 2010
Posted on: May 23, 2011 4:25 pm
 

Appeal ruling boils down to recognition of union

By the way, Eric (in addition to my comment of a little while ago), you mention that Judge Nelson's ruling contains a description of "the history of the labor dispute".  I haven't read the decision itself, but if she really did call it a "labor dispute"--as you did--that pretty much gives away the game right there, doesn't it? 
Judge Nelson did not call it a "labor dipute", my bad.  The judge refers to it as a dispute.  As I mentioned in my previous post, I am not a lawyer.





Since: Jan 26, 2010
Posted on: May 23, 2011 4:20 pm
 

Appeal ruling boils down to recognition of union

Hi argo444,

I was replying mainly to this part of the original post:

So this -- "Are the players still a union?" -- is the dispute, legally speaking, that will decide whether or not we continue to have a lockout. If the Appeals Court believes/rules that the NFLPA truly disbanded, they'll lift the lockout. If they don't believe that, they'll leave the lockout in place, because, in their eyes, no court has jurisdiction over such a labor-related matter.

Here's the biggest problem, for those hoping the lockout will end: if the Appeals Court rules that the NFLPA broke up in good faith and is truly no longer a union (versus simply disbanding for legal leverage), they will establish a nightmarish precedent for themselves.
Recognition that the NFLPA is now a trade association and not a union would not set a precedent, it has happened before.  So I'm just saying that the rest of the stuff in the post doesn't seem worth worrying about and the court of appeals wouldn't be setting a precedent by recognizing the decertification of the union.  Of course that's just one non-lawyer commenting on what another non-lawyer thinks can happen.

I am worried that there is no resolution in sight and that there will be no NFL football in 2011.



Since: Jul 9, 2009
Posted on: May 23, 2011 4:01 pm
 

Appeal ruling boils down to recognition of union

By the way, Eric (in addition to my comment of a little while ago), you mention that Judge Nelson's ruling contains a description of "the history of the labor dispute".  I haven't read the decision itself, but if she really did call it a "labor dispute"--as you did--that pretty much gives away the game right there, doesn't it? 


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com