NFL makes "non-economic proposals" to NFLPA

Given the recent squabbles between the NFL and the NFL Players Association, any progress in labor talks is good news.

And, on Tuesday, the two sides apparently made some progress.  In a banker’s hours session that wrapped long enough before 4:00 p.m. ET to permit the issuance of a press release by the NFLPA, the parties discussed “some non-core CBA issues.”

In other words, they talked about issues that the league and the union regard as unimportant.  For example, the current CBA prohibits teams or the league from disciplining players for hair length.  The league has, at times, shown some interest in preventing the Samson/Gene Simmons look that several players are sporting.  So that’s one issue that, if it was addressed, would be regarded as “non-core.”  (And, of course, 12.6 percent of you will interpret this paragraph as an affirmative report that hair length was discussed.  And two of you will leave a smartass comment along the lines of, “So they discussed hair length?”)

The NFLPA described the meeting as “good.”

Perhaps more importantly, the statement released by the union closes with an indication that another meeting will be held “in the coming weeks” during which the union “will respond to the league’s non-economic proposals.”

This implies that the league has presented the union with a list of things the league wants to see in the next Collective Bargaining Agreement unrelated to player compensation.  Despite the fact that the broader talks are expected to focus on money, there’s a lingering sense that the union snookered the league in 2006 at a time when the owners were focused only on the 59-plus cents on the dollar that is paid to the players and the issue of revenue sharing.  As we heard it at the time, the league paid little or no attention to non-economic terms contained in the union’s take-it-or-leave-it proposal.

This time around, the league might want to recapture some of the ground that previously was lost.

Regardless, they’re at least talking, which is good.  And hopefully the next meeting set loosely for “the coming weeks” will come before the first snowflake flies over FedEx Field.

12 responses to “NFL makes "non-economic proposals" to NFLPA

  1. Seems pointless to only discuss length?!? I mean, there is so much more that goes into it; body…style…shine…just ask the people that make Florio’s.

  2. haha, are you ok Florio? are all of your post going to end with you taking the 1st shot at the people who comment to your post?
    i dont comment very often but that wasnt called for, you take something as serious as a lockout to make a point to a COUPLE of people that dont agree with your work?
    you better try relaxing Florio & thinking before you fight with people on PFT/NBC blogs, thats unprofessional. i dont come here to read your kidish arguments with a couple people that read your blog. you should be thankful to anyone reading your post & be happy their sill here, i’m sure if they notice a decline in hits/comments in your blogs someone else will have your job.
    i would really appreciate it the next i read this blog that i wont have witness something childish like that again. ty in advance sir for all your hard work & have a great day!
    : concerned reader

  3. So wait a sec…..if I am reading this right (and I could be wrong), the players sign a contract for XXX dollars, then they also get 59 cents on the dollar from revenue sharing?
    So if that is correct, how in the fk can any player claim poverty at any time they are playing? Further, I would challenge any one of them to get paid minimum wage for the actual hours they work and nothing more. Wonder how many of them would be willing to do something I would guess over half their fans do every day of their lives…….

  4. So, I’m assuming that with a hair-length cap comes a hair-length floor. Matt Hasselbeck should be very concerned with this development!

  5. Visanthe Shiancoe and Chris Cooley tried to get in on the discussions too. They went home when they found out that the talks were about hair length instead of penis length, though.

Leave a Reply