Am I wrong or is this lockout completely illegal? Since the union decertified, the owners are now just locking out a collection of unaffiliated workers for no good reason. There doesn't need to be a CBA if there's not a union, because it's just like any other industry. Of course, this also means that there's no salary cap or free agency restrictions because the owners of NFL franchises can't collude to create rules which hamper the free market of employment.
The lockout (again, as I understand it) is allowable solely based on the presumption that the decertification was a sham and will be recognized as such in court. And, assuming that's unlikely (not a reach considering that's how it went down last time), the owners will end up with a much worse deal than they were being offered by the players originally (or at the very least, players get much more of what they want than the owners were willing to give).
I feel like there must be something wrong with how I understand it, because the owners couldn't possibly be so dumb to push this to the courts. The players have all the cards - if the owners want to enjoy the privilege of owning in a monopolized industry AND have the players' employment restricted by rules to which every other owner must adhere, then they have to get the okay from their employees.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment