Some of you may recall articles I have previously posted about the CBA, citing Gabe Feldman, Law Professor at Tulane University specializing in Sports Labor Law. As I sat down for a little NFL Network time last night, I was first fascinated by the guys talking about us taking Gabbert at #1.
Then to the news, around the league. And then, Alex Flanagan brings on their legal expert to discuss the CBA situation and on screen pops Gabe Feldman. I'm thinking, I know that name. Hey, that's Gabe, the guy that writes great Sports Law articles, and even emailed me one time. For some background, you may want to read my prior posts on the subject:
You can find the NFLN video links after the jump...
The NFL Network story last night was actually a two part interview. The link to part one is below.
To me, it's still just a lot of velvet ropes and posturing, but the threat is there that many of the basic tenets of the NFL could be smashed by the Anti-Trust litigation. Then again, they may not, unless it's ruled the Owners are seeking a "sea change." There's also a pending claim by the League filed with the Nat'l Labor Relations Board, stating that decertification should not be allowed because it is essentially a "sham" intended solely as a bargaining maneuver.
It didn't help the owners' cause that a Federal Judge ruled against them over the $4billion in television revenues they were banking on in a lockout scenario. Here's what Gabe had to say about that:in part 2 of the interview:
That's a big hit financially, legally, and in public opinion against the owners.
Since last night, Gabe has tweeted the following, referencing the comment above about decertification and the "sham" factor:
And, yes, the NFL's "walks like a duck defense" means the union is still operating, decert is a sham, and antitrust law not an option.
If/when NFLPA decertifies, NFL will block with the "duck" defense. If it looks like a union, talks like a union, it's still a union.
I tweeted Gabe this morning questioning the possible use of the 'impasse' argument by the owners, allowing them to unilaterally impose their 'last, best offer.' Hopefully he'll respond, and I will update this post.
Hey, I like learning shit, and in that I've been successful through my research. On the other hand, I'm a football fan, not a law student, and I'm Ready For Some Football. Dammit.
Response to my tweet about impasse:
@Kootcheroo No. Owners don't want to implement terms,will tee up antitrust claims for players.They want lockout-- puts more pressure on.
Tweets from earlier today, and about the 24 hour extension:
Gives them more time to work out a longer extension RT @darrenrovell Don't really know what a 24 hour NFL labor talks extension would do.
Players have no antitrust claims right now.Claims only arise after decert if 1)owners lock them out or 2) owners implement rules.
Timing for possible decert of the NFLPA? Electronic filing deadline in federal court is midnight (local court time).
I'll continue to monitor the tweets, and provide more updates. Doesn't necessarily sound like he's convince a deal is imminent, though.