Results 1 to 4 of 4
Thread: Why is there a Players' Union?
08-30-02 02:45 PM #1
Why is there a Players' Union?
Right before the agreement was reached, three teams called player representatives and said that they would not go on strike.
So why the hell is there a Players' Union?
Your Union is supposed to go out there and get the best deal possible for you.
By telling the Union that you won't strike, you handcuff the Union, forcing them to take whatever deal is on the table at the last minute, giving the owners a victory like the one they got today.
And if you're going to gift-wrap a win for the owners anyway, then why even discuss a strike. Just finish out the season and let them implement whatever rules they want to at the end of the season. It's pretty much the same outcome.
Also, why the hell would you wait until now to say that you won't strike?
If you're not going to go on strike, say that when you're discussing setting a strike date.
Then at least it's a bargaining chip.
But if you wait until the last minute, the reps have no time to factor that into the negotiation equation.
Not to mention that if the owners get wind of that, all leverage goes right out the window.
Also, if replacement players in '94 were outcast because they refused to go along with the Union. Does that mean that 75 players are now viewed as "scabs." They refused to go along with the Union, so all three teams should be outcast the way the '94 Scabs were.
It just seems to me that the Union went in there trying to get a deal that was fair for the players, and that the players themselves then handcuffed the Union, forcing them to give in to the owners.
The way I see it, if you're going to do that, there's not much point in having a Union at all.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)