If I did a horrible job and wrecked his lawn, why shouldn’t he be able to fire me and find someone better at raking leaves?

You need to retake your math class…….because you missed a 0! That total would be $8,400,000,00! Which one of us can run out and tell our employers that we want all of these huge concessions because they made a lot more this year than last? And would we then be willing to give it back if they take a loss? That is NOT how business works. These guys get free travel, food, housing, and more BEYOND their pay/pension/and benefits for a PART TIME JOB! They wanted guaranteed that they worked at least 15 games? Wow, $15-20k per game…..and they still want more? Yes, the owners are watching their own pockets…….but THEY are the owners. These guys do not have to keep these jobs. If they feel they are being used and cheaply paid, they can quit! I am not condoning total greed by the owners either, but compromise is needed on ALL sides!

You need to retake your math class! You missed a 0! That should read 120 x

1. While many on here are saying they don’t deserve pensions, the thing you have to keep in mind is that the NFL is not just saying, “I want to set up a business with a 401K”, they are saying, “OK, so when I hired you X years ago, we had an agreement to have pensions, but now I’m going to switch it on you, axe your pension plan, and convert it all to a 401K where you pay.” So, while you may not think a PT employee deserves a pension, you may also not think it’s right for an employer to just switch rules on you in the middle of the game. It’s easy to just say “unions are greedy” but retirement is VERY expensive and the unions are not the ones switching the rules mid-game.

2. You may think that the unions are asking too much. OK, fine, well then the NFL is within it’s rights to fire these guys and get replacements. Oh wait, they have replacements and they are not skilled enough. Therefore, according to the principals of supply and demand, now that they are faced with a limited supply of skilled workers, and they have a demand, the owners need to negotiate a fair price for those workers.

It amazes me how many people are anti-unions and implying that the refs are greedy for wanting to have their retirement pension not taken away. They are negotiating with men who are FAR RICHER than them. Don’t feel sorry for the owners. They can AFFORD to pay the refs and the fact that they don’t only underscores that they are not worried about putting out a subpar product if it means saving a few dollars.

Bring the thumbs down; I don’t care.

In response, the league can let them keep the pensions they already have and give them the raise they want. Heck, give them more money for making them full-time and compensating for them giving up other ventures. It’s pennies on the dollar anyway, and if you’re already admitting that their experience and skills are needed, it’s well worth it.

Zaggs has a point: pensions for part time employees seems unlikely. I have a couple of other points:
a) If the officials are covering all the games, how is that not full time by NFL standards?
b) If the NFL’s brand becomes a laughingstock–and it might have already–the refs bargaining power goes up and up and up. They have something the NFL and its BILLIONS of dollars in revenue can’t get anywhere else. ANYWHERE. Goodell and the rest of the NFL has already gambled and lost–now they need to suck it up and admit it. Hell, they expect the players to play hurt, who gives a crap if they feel like they’ve been made to look bad?

Nobody does defined benefit plans anymore, except the government, and most of those are underfunded. See GM and Chrysler as to why everybody is going to a defined contribution plan.

You make an interesting point. That might be a way to a concession, however something to consider. A lot of businesses have been moving away from them for some time.

If an employee is terminated, then they lose their pension especially considering that the league is putting all of the money in. This is probably one of the big reasons that the refs don’t want an evaluation process.

With a 401k, then all of the money put in, the employee keeps, they just don’t get anything afterwards. Think about it, they want free money for life after they retire, and they want to make sure that they don’t lose it no matter how bad they are.

I would say give them more now, while they are working and forget the pension. Since the NFL is funding it, they could pull it all and then where would the refs be?

sippindasyzurp: The NFL did offer them full time employment, that is the problem, the refs don’t want to give up their other lucrative full time jobs.

For anyone that keeps saying that aren’t part time jobs, you are full of it.

1. The definition of a part time job is any job for which you work less than 35 hours a week. Even with Hoculi’s supposed 30 hours a week, it is still part time.

2. The refs themselves call it a part time job, and they refuse to quit their “full” time jobs to become “full” time refs.

Soon we’ll have six-man Indian officiating crews making calls over the phone that are hard to understand.

The owners would like to feel like they’re getting their money’s worth and paying an 8% increase to ppl who have made plenty of blown calls only want to work part time and want exorbitant pension plans with 0 accountability to boot is a deal only a moron would take.

There is most definitely a specialized skill set that is not easily replacable. Period. No one can refute this. Not any of you, not Roger Goddell, not anyone. And my goodness, if there are any of you left still saying these replacements refs aren’t that bad, you are simply stupid. They are, have been, and will continue to be.

My friends that specialized skill set is becoming more and more apparent each week. That is a big bargaining chip. Pay the men Roger! Just pay ‘em.

It’s absurd to compare the Refs with all of us average joe’s at jobs in large companies, and base their argument against a pension based upon that.

1) These are 120 elite level individuals with extremely specialized skills. The experiment with the replacements prove that they are not widgets that you can just plug in….which is the reality for most workers out there in America.

2) The NFL is not a regular business model….it’s a monopoly of epic proporitions. It doesn’t operate under typical free-market conditions. And since when should employees be forced to take reduction in benefits when their employer is more flush with money than ever? This isn’t like GM or Chrysler going bankrupt because of employee retirement cost.

As I undertand it, the money we are talking about here is $3.2M annually, which comes out to $100k/team…..so we are talking like 1/3rd of the absoulte rookie minimum salary for a player.

This has become ideological for the owners, they don’t want to look weak by backing down. The numbers are irrelevant to them.

That’s my 2 cents.

Yes, we know that refs, though technically part-time employees, spend the whole year studying the rule book and getting quizzed by the head of officiating and it may feel like a full time job sometimes.

But still, a pension is a bit tough to swallow, especially considering how well they are paid for each game. The NFL is being generous even in a 401K offering.

But the big problem I have is, the union has been complaining about how player safety has been compromised – yet, as the administrators of Div I college refs, whom most could be competent replacements, the union said it would fire any Div I ref who worked NFL games.

Of course, its obvious why they did that – to pressure the NFL by forcing them to turn to crappy replacements, Div II and lower. But I guess player safety isn’t that important after all to the union.

It is? Not being able to replace bad refs is a sign of progress? Let’s not kid ourselves, the real refs cost teams games with blown calls, too. And there’s going to be absolutely no way of immediately getting rid of one of them when that happens again?