Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
NHLPA
#1
The NHLPA is ridiculous.

They appeal a suspension of a wife beater.

They appeal the suspension of repeat offender who seriously injured one of its members.

I guess they are like the court appointed defense team and have to represent players no matter how guilty and despicable they are, but it’s hard to take them seriously when they then try and stand up on serious issues like CBA negotiations and plate safety.

I don’t know the solution. Do you separate the two somehow. One body actually has the players best interests in mind. All of them. And some other body does the crappy defend anyone and everyone role.

In its current make up it is a total joke.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#2
They aren't there to protect each other from each other. they are there to protect there money earned against the NHL.

that's really it.

They will appeal any suspension if the player chooses to do so. doesn't matter what the victim wants. and when it comes to domestic's etc its the same. It's not that they are a joke, thats kind of like calling the defense lawyer for a murderer a joke.. someone has to do it.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#3
If a player wants to file a appeal the NHLPA has not choice That's part of a player's right. It doesn't matter if they agree with it or not.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#4
I realize this. But it’s hard to take the same organization seriously when they try to champion player safety and negotiate CBA’s.

I don’t know if they could separate the two somehow. But it would definitely be on the players best interests

As of right now people can think of the NHLPA as defenders of wife beaters and the NHL as the moral light.

I am sure Bettman loves it. It just adds fuel to the anti player sentiment in future negotiations.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#5
If you want to blame someone blame the neutral arbitrator’s ruling to reduce the suspension.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#6
I think you have to distinguish violent acts from hockey acts.

Wilson's hit, to me, was not a violent play that beyond an expected hockey play. The NHLA is right to appeal the hit and it is in the best interests in the PA do to so. By accepting the punishment, it is setting a new standard for the rest of the PA and increasing the monetary consequences of their actions for 'hockey' plays.

Plays that extend beyond what is an expected hockey play is different. Plays like Bertuzzi on Moore, Or McSorley on Brashear are the violent plays that players do not want in the league. That is the safety that the PA has to champion and danger that has become more rare. That is where the PA and DoPS are successful.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#7
(2018-10-12, 09:50 PM)Wulfgar85 Wrote: If you want to blame someone blame the neutral arbitrator’s ruling to reduce the suspension.

Why not just blame the perpetrator who filed an appeal
Reply
Thanks given by:
#8
(2018-10-12, 07:48 PM)himmelblau Wrote: I guess they are like the court appointed defense team and have to represent players no matter how guilty and despicable they are, but it’s hard to take them seriously when they then try and stand up on serious issues like CBA negotiations and plate safety.

You've kind of answered your own question here.

Unions have a fiduciary duty to defend the rights of their members. They can actually be sued if they fail in the duty to provide fair representation.

It's really no different than accused criminals being entitled to due process and being provided defense lawyers under our justice system.

I don't find it hard to 'take them seriously' at all because their members are entitled to rights under the COLLECTIVELY BARGAINED agreement between the parties...an agreement that both the NHL and the NHLPA are party to.

I capitalized that bit because it's important for people to understand that the right of a member to challenge a disciplinary decision is enshrined in the C.A.; a document that was negotiated and agreed to by both parties, not just the NHLPA.

I know there will be a perception among a portion of the public that the NHLPA is 'defending wife beaters and headhunters', but that is a perception borne of ignorance.

The Union has no choice in the matter. They must defend the member's rights under the process. Just like a duty council defending a murderer does.
"I drink to make other people interesting"
~ E. Hemmingway
Reply
Thanks given by:
#9
I guess why I hate unions so much
Reply
Thanks given by: Justaleafan , Justaleafan
#10
Also. Does a union ever say ya that sounds about right?

I guess not in these cases.
Reply
Thanks given by: Justaleafan
#11
Meh, you're not alone.

We get a bad rap even though we do plenty of good in the world. Sad
"I drink to make other people interesting"
~ E. Hemmingway
Reply
Thanks given by:
#12
(2018-10-12, 10:35 PM)himmelblau Wrote: Also. Does a union ever say ya that sounds about right?  

I guess not in these cases.

If I'm being honest I say that to myself more than anyone knows. However the member has a right to challenge and at the end of the day the case will be decided by a disinterested third party based on it's merits. Or lack of same.
"I drink to make other people interesting"
~ E. Hemmingway
Reply
Thanks given by:
#13
If this is true, you might wanna find a new girl Austin
Reply
Thanks given by:
#14
(2018-10-14, 12:03 AM)CTS Wrote: If this is true,  you might wanna find a new girl Austin

They have a child together
Reply
Thanks given by:
#15
(2018-10-12, 10:27 PM)himmelblau Wrote: I guess why I hate unions so much

True.  Without them, employers would always act in a free and fair manner anyhow.
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)