It's quite possible we are talking about two different points. This conversation is carried over from yesterday, so I'm going to have to look back and make sure I'm on the right page here.
Edit: I looked back over the conversation. My basic point is that a Union that generates Billions in revenue for who it's contracted to work for, has more leverage then just your basic Union in the work force.
- MJL
Well ya, but that's simple semantics, the original point I was making was that in any CBA, the labor side loses either a little or a lot progressively as each CBA is negotiated. There are strong unions and weak unions and the strong ones will lose the least, but in the end, they will always lose.
And by lose I don't necessarily mean lose outright, but more so lose certain benefits, perks, wages etc... all based on the revenues, profits and operating costs of the corporation.
The NHLPA or any other pro-sports union for that matter have a lot of power primarily because of the unique business in which they are employed. To state the obvious, they represent constituents who make literally millions of dollars per year/contract individually, and they represent only that particular group of people. Unlike labor unions who often represent several or even dozens of different worker types within their particular trade or business.
I understand what you're saying, but in the end, a CBA is a CBA and the union that negotiates it is always at the mercy of the corporation that employs it's constituents and the revenue that corporation generates to some extent. More leverage aside, the NHLPA will be forced to give in to the majority of the Leagues demands if they want to end this lockout. As in most CBA's, the players(laborers) will get some of the concessions they are asking for but will undoubtedly lose more than they gain.
As in any business/trade or what have you, there comes a point when the laborers have to see the forest for the trees and realize there are limitations hampering their futile efforts that simply protect the greater good of the company/business. In the case of the NHLPA, they have to decide whether the deal they agree to is going to be better for them or better for the preservation of the league overall and the future sustainability of the league.
I don't think the owners offers have been unfair, however I do think they need to find a way to throw the PA a few more bones if they want this lockout to end without more long term damage to the league.
