NFLPA warns of lockout without mentioning impact of decertification

The NFL Players Association continues to use talk of a looming lockout to stir up fan, media, and political support for its current labor struggle with the league.  Most recently, NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith told that a lockout is a “virtual certainty” in 2011.

On the surface, that’s somewhat better than Smith’s previously assessment of the chances of a lockout being at 14 on a scale of one to 10.

But as pointed out on Friday’s edition of The Dan Patrick Show, guest-hosted by a certain Internet hack with a face for radio and a voice for print, there’s a clear disconnect between the union’s lockout rhetoric and the reality that the union has crisscrossed the country to line up authorization from its players to decertify (or, as the NFL describes it, “go out of business”).

Decertification would prevent a lockout, because there would be no combined work force to prevent from working.  So I asked NFLPA spokesman George Atallah during his Friday visit to The Dan Patrick Show why the union doesn’t mention, when banging the drum in the halls of Congress regarding a lockout, the fact that the union has secured the ultimate silver bullet — the ability to shut down the process and proceed as a group of individual employees.

Atallah stopped short of saying that the union definitely would implement decertification, explaining that the players continue to prefer to work things out at the bargaining table.  But none of this changes the fact that, when sounding the lockout alarm, the NFLPA isn’t telling the entire story to the media, the fans, or the politicians.

So whenever De Smith says that a lost 2011 football season would trigger “$5 billion in lost wages, taxes and other revenue,” he should point out the fact that the union has pieced together the ability to prevent the NFL from locking out the players, if/when it comes to that.

If the union so desperately wants to avoid financial consequences to the stadium workers and other collateral employees whom the union claims to hope to protect, they should make it clear right now that there won’t be a lockout because the players plan to employ one of the same tactics off the field that they commonly used on it.

A block.

8 responses to “NFLPA warns of lockout without mentioning impact of decertification

  1. One moment the NFL and Union are having intense negotiations. The next moment there’s talk of a lock out. Which is it? They’ll work it out some year. This year, next year or the year after possibly. Life goes on.

  2. I THINK THE CARTEL OWNERS OF THE NFL ARE GREEDY; THEY SET THE OUTRAGIOUS BEER PRICES, TICKET PRICES AND EXTORT CITIES FOR FREE STADIUMS AND EVEN HIRE FIRMS TO FIGURE OUT HOW BEST TO RIPOFF CITIES! And they are excellent in rolling down payrolls in an uncapped season, when the NETWORKS are paying full price, and new stadiums are opening and people are paying, paying and paying for seat licenses, yet JERRY JONES says other business’s have adjusted and so must the NFL! CRAZY! GREEDY!

  3. I fully support the players and the NFLPA.

    Frankly, a strike sounds like an intriguing and potentially entertaining prospect at this time.

    Oh, and I oppose an “expanded season.” Keep it at 16 please.

  4. Come on florio, can you make a single post about this without carrying water for the owners?

    The owners decided to opt out of the CBA, not the players.

    Decertification is the only tool the players have and they are using it.

    It must be scaring the hell out of the owners (and you) by the way you’ve been railing against it.

  5. Cowboyerik do you know the details of the Dallas Stadium and most NFL stadiums? The owners always put up more money then the cities and states. The NFL also contributes money to the stadiums. Jerry Jones paid roughly $600 million of the over $1 billion stadium all to give the fans the best experience as possible. The 49ers are offering to pay $870+ million of their $915 million dollar stadium and San Francisco would rather see them leave then pony up the extra cash. Any large stadium or venue is a huge booster for the economy. I don’t understand the uppercase name calling of the owners when really without them we wouldn’t have the sport.

    You say owners are greedy when you have a lazy pile of crap in Albert Haynesworth who took a $21 million roster bonus and then held out of practice cause he wanted to be traded. You want owners who earned their franchises one way or another to be less greedy when all they do is deal with greedy players. The players get roughly 60% of the annual income of the league. Go look at most other big industries and find any where the cut for the employees is that high. Players don’t want to give any of their 60% and help out retired players and their health problems they want a bigger cut then 60% and then on top of that have the NFL take care of the retired players as well. What union does that? NFL players are more greedy then the owners cause at the end of the Day it is the owners league and if the players go away there are 1000’s of players to take their place. If the owners go away there is a small handful of people and corporations that would be willing to jump aboard for that much money while giving up more then 60% of the income to the players.

    Cowboys Stadium details

  6. xtb3 says: Nov 27, 2010 12:06 AM

    Owners endless greed is causing this no matter how the media they can and do influence spins it.
    The one thing you’ll never understand, unless you own your own business one day, is “risk”.

    This is where it all starts.

    Without the owners coughing up hundreds of millions of dollars, there would be NO NFL. You need mega bucks and super sized cahunnies to do what they did.

    I’ll tell you this, if I had to payout 55-60% of my take for wages, I’d close it down.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!