Saints quarterback Drew Brees is a member of the NFLPA executive committee. As such he speaks for the players union. NFL owners beat the drum about a broken compensation system while Brees essentially says player income is a percentage of revenues. Both team revenue and player salaries are going up. How is that broken? Aint' broke, don't fix it. Think strike - both sides have a lot to lose.

The NFL's team owners have unanimously agreed to a proposed 10 year contract with the recertified NFLPA which should result in an end to the lockout and teams practicing by the week-end. New Orleans player representative Heath Evans cautions, the players' agreement is not certain. While it appears the economic issues are settled - the owners will not take a slice off the top anymore - Evans claims there are things included in the owners approved deal that the players have never discussed. Also yesterday the August 7 Hall of Fame game was cancelled.

The Eighth Circuit has handed the owners an encouraging win by granting a stay of the injunction of the owner's lockout. In so doing the court does a pretty good job of explaining how the Norris-LaGuardia Act prohibits injunctions of labor disputes. A labor dispute can occur even in the absence of a certified union, thus the player's decertification, in the court's view, did not make the Norris-LaGuardia Act's prohibitions on injunctions inapplicable.

The NFL has filed a Cert. petition in the Star Caps case, claiming the NLRA preempts state law protecting players from the collectively bargained anti-drug policy. OUr previous post on the Eighth Circuit's opinion is here.

As we expected Federal Judge Susan Nelson has enjoined the owners lockout, citing irreparable harm not only to the players careers, but to non-parties like concessionaires and fans. WOW! And if the owners are waiting for the NLRB to declare the decertification of the union an illegal tactic, then they live in a fantasy world far less real than fantasy football. Moreover, Judge Nelson pretty well rejected the argument, which was a stretch from the beginning. Saints have posted the NFL's statement on the ruling here.

March 4, June 30, and December 11 2011 are fateful dates for labor according to this AP feed.  Those are the dates the NFL, NBA and MLB labor agreements expire. (The NFL agreement expires September 15, 2012). Lockouts loom likely in both the NFL and NBA, although it seems more likely MLB will reach a deal. Perhaps that is because baseball suffered twelve years of reduced attendance after the 1994-95 strike. These labor negotiations are a potential game changer for labor which has seen its public image take a huge hit in the last few years. Prior posts here. The players are the presumptive beneficiaries of public opinion, but the anti-labor noise machine has not engaged yet. This will be an epic public relations struggle, and one with high stakes for organized labor, not to mention the fans and the host cities. Who will take the fall for the disruption? That is the underlying struggle worth watching.

Roger Goodell says its possible. Players association representative says "no comment." You can take the other side of this bet and give the points, plenty of points.

What would an NFL lockout cost each city with a team? A lot, says a new study discussed here.

It appears the NFL owners are prepared to refund ticket purchasers if a lockout cancels games in 2011. Smart move by the owners to avoid ill will in the public relations battle for the hearts and minds of the fans.

Mike Florio analyzes the ten questions the players union has posed to the NFL.

Could the NBA and the NFL both have 2011 lockouts?

Mike Triplett has a great piece in the Times Picayune about the Saint's players comments on  the breakdown in negotiations for the new CBA. Saint's quarterback Drew Brees is quoted as are many others. The PR war has already started, but these Saints provide an articulate defense to the players position. A word of caution to the fan following this issue. Network reports on the lockout have every reason to be biased in favor of the owners. Not only do they owe the owners $4 billion if the games are not played, they have to negotiate television rights with those same owners. Expect the owners to get better than even treatment and coverage.

Surprised? I am. Expired collective bargaining agreement, decertification and probable lockout. No disrespect to the tragedy in Japan, but this is a metaphorical tsunami that can well damage all concerned. I think going forward it will be very difficult for the owners in both a court of law and the court of public opinion. The NFL/NFLPA Collective Bargaining Agreement expired because the players would not agree to extend it unless the owners provided the financial information the players had requested. The big sticking point in the negotiations is the owners insistence their costs have risen necessitating taking a second billion off the top of the revenue pie. (The owners want to take $2 billion of the roughly $9 billion in annual revenue generated by the league, before splitting the rest under a formula that provides roughly 60% to player compensation.) Yet the owners are only offering to provide limited access to financial information. This sounds like the typical discovery dispute - one side provides documents requested by the other side and after the production, the requesting party says it needs more. The real issue is hard to assess. Irrespective of the merits of what was produced and whether it was sufficient, I think owners will have a difficult time convincing anyone they provided all the financials the union needed.

The clock is ticking on the expiration of the extended collective bargaining agreement between the National Football League (NFL) and the National Football League Players Association(NFLPA). Current deadline is tonight at 11:59 p.m. USA Today has an interesting, if bare bones assessment of what could happen. My bet is on another extension. The players have signaled their willingness to talk - there has been no talk of a strike. The owners have rattled the lockout saber thereby assuming the roll of the party willing to walk, but really? This labor/management dispute plays to labor's strengths. Highly skilled athletes bargaining for more. Billionaire owners wanting to increase their guaranteed slice of the estimated 9 billion dollar golden goose that is the NFL. It does not hurt the players position that the owners want a $100% increase in their guaranteed slice off the top. This dispute plays out against the backdrop of the fans. Who will they blame if Sundays from August to February (and a few Mondays, Saturdays and Thursdays too) are devoid of action, or if the only action is by replacement players? I think thats an easy call if the owners lockout the players. Nevertheless a lockout has the same potential economic consequences for the players as a strike, and they are all adverse. No pay, no benefits, and potentially a lost season for players who have precious few years to play anyway. The owners should be gleeful the players threaten to decertify the union (actually a disclaimer of interest that would lead to decertification). It allows the owners to back off the lockout position and continue negotiations, at least at this point. Decertification likely will likely place all of this in a courtroom, a consequence which should be feared more by the defendant, because the teams, as defendants in an antitrust action have a potential dreadful downside. I think the owners should be very concerned about American Needle v. NFL, which rejected the owners argument that the league by necessity had to act jointly in marketing decisions. Yeah, that may be a simplistic analysis, but the case firmly rejected the NFL's broad interpretation of the anti-trust exemption.

Here is a recent post about the influence Patriot's owner Robert Kraft has in league matters in general, and in decision making about labor policy and the looming potential lockout. No one has more stature and clout.

Looks like the NFL/NFLPA mediation is getting serious. Here is the statement from the mediator. Also now he says we ain't commenting anymore. Sounds like progress otherwise everybody would be posturing talking.

The NFL signaled, again, its intention to play hardball. NFL Commissioner Goodell says the NFL's decision is a good reason for the NFLPA to come to the bargaining table and reach a new deal with the league.

The NFL is big business and the collateral damage from a lockout would hurt more than just the players and the owners.

In a move that seems more designed to curry favor with fans and the media, the National Football League (NFL) has filed refusal to bargain charges against the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA). The charges are largely directed at the players threat and authorization to decertify (disband) the union, which likely would bring into play antitrust claims against the owners if they choose to lock out the players. There is an antitrust exemption for collective bargaining, but if the union goes away, so does the reason supporting the exemption. The players have decertified the union before, and that resulted in free agency and the salary cap which were created to settle earlier antitrust litigation. This is another volley in the public relations battle for fan support. While one observer claims the owners will win the PR battle, I'm not a believer. In fact I think his argument that things will get too complicated for fans to sort out works in favor of the players. If the owners lock the players out, you can expect the anti-labor noise machine to crank up full volume in support of the owners, but the simple issue for fans will be the owners created the problem.