MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

GA Russell · 03-13-2011, 11:57 PM

I know nothing about labor law. I don't understand why the NFL owners have locked out the players.

Now that the union has decertified, that means there is no union, right? So why don't the teams just go ahead and sign whoever wishes to join them (not already under contract) for a salary the team and each player agree upon? Why the lockout?

I do understand the anti-trust issue. (I haven't seen any news item bring up the USFL case in which it was determined that the NFL is a monopoly.) So I understand why P Manning is suing that his designation as a franchise player is (without a union agreement) a restraint of trade. And I understand why the Texas Aggie is suing that the draft is also a restraint of trade.

It would seem to me that the teams could simply agree to go forward without the draft and the designations, and just budget their payrolls so as to keep more revenue for themselves. That is to say, they could agree to the plaintiffs' demands (in the absence of a union) and still budget an increased share of the revenue for themselves. What's stopping them? So why the lockout?

03-13-2011, 11:57 PM	#1
GA Russell What a weekend! Posts: 7,697 Karma: 31487351 Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Raleigh, NC Device: Paperwhite, Kindles 10 & 4 and jetBook Lite	NFL: Any US labor lawyers here? I know nothing about labor law. I don't understand why the NFL owners have locked out the players. Now that the union has decertified, that means there is no union, right? So why don't the teams just go ahead and sign whoever wishes to join them (not already under contract) for a salary the team and each player agree upon? Why the lockout? I do understand the anti-trust issue. (I haven't seen any news item bring up the USFL case in which it was determined that the NFL is a monopoly.) So I understand why P Manning is suing that his designation as a franchise player is (without a union agreement) a restraint of trade. And I understand why the Texas Aggie is suing that the draft is also a restraint of trade. It would seem to me that the teams could simply agree to go forward without the draft and the designations, and just budget their payrolls so as to keep more revenue for themselves. That is to say, they could agree to the plaintiffs' demands (in the absence of a union) and still budget an increased share of the revenue for themselves. What's stopping them? So why the lockout?