Image by Getty Images via @daylife
I’ve heard a lot of fans asking why the players walked away so speedily on Friday and right away decertified and filed an antitrust suit. A lot of of you also wonder what specifically the players are suing over and how it will impact the scenario in football going forward. I’ll attempt to answer all your questions here:
Why did the players association decertify? The players association decertified so they could file the antitrust lawsuit. The “non-statutory labor exemption” in labor law protects collective bargaining agreements from attack under the antitrust laws. In truth, even soon after the collective bargaining agreement expired, as long as a “bargaining relationship” continued to exist between the NFL and NFLPA, the labor practices would have been immune from attack under the antitrust laws. By decertifying, the players ended the collective bargaining relationship and had been able to file an antitrust suit.
Why did the players association decertify when they did? An intriguing component of theВ recently-expired collective bargaining agreementВ was a provision that prohibited an antitrust case from being filed by players until six months right after the agreement expired if the players association decertified right after the expiration of the agreement. The agreement was set to expire Friday night at midnight, so the players association necessary to decertifyВ by FridayВ in order to steer clear of that waiting period.
What are the players suing over? Antitrust laws are meant to encourage competition within industries and promote fair organization practices. A number of practices in the NFL could be challenged on the grounds that they violate antitrust law: restricted free of charge agency, the franchise tag and the salary cap, to name a couple of. Essentially, any practice that could be seen as restricting a player’s capacity to earn money or change teams.
Which players sued the NFL? The named plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Vincent Jackson, Ben Leber, Logan Mankins, Peyton Manning, Brian Robinson, Osi Umenyiora, Mike Vrabel and incoming rookie Von Miller. Nevertheless, the suit is filed as a class action claim, meaning itВ covers all present players and incoming rookies like Miller. Adding Miller as a plaintiff allows themВ to attack any provisions that affect rookies like the rookie salary pool cap.
Can football be played while the lawsuit is pending? Totally. Until the owners announced the lockout late Friday evening, the 2011 season was still intact. Football can be played even whilst the players association is decertified. The lawsuit also does not affect the ability of the 2011 season to commence. The players association previously decertified in 1989 and did not reorganize until 1993, throughout which time Reggie WhiteВ and others brought a class action antitrust suit against the league.В Meanwhile, football continued toВ be played. It is only in the caseВ of a lockoutВ (initiated by the league) or a strike (initiated by the players) that football ceases.
What has happened in the past when the players sued the NFL for antitrust violations? There have been three instances that illustrate the nature of antitrust claims against the league over the years: Mackey, Powell and White.
The Mackey case attacked the “Rozelle Rule,” which provided that the commissioner could compensate any team who lost a totally free agent with something of equivalent value from the team gaining the player, normally draft picks. The court ruled that this was an impermissible restraint on player movement. Nonetheless, it’s critical to note that this rule was unilaterally implemented by owners. Had it been the item of collective bargaining, it would have been allowed under the non-statutory labor exemption described above. This is why you’ve seen comparable provisions in collective bargaining agreements reached after this case.
The Powell case centered around a “right of very first refusal” rule related to totally free agency. Nevertheless, this was a collectively bargained provision (which presumably got into the agreement due to the fact owners and more power and leverage in negotiations than the players), so it was protected by the non-statutory labor exemption. Again, the item of collective bargaining can’t be attacked on antitrust grounds.
The White case a lot more closely mirrors the situation at hand. The players association decertifed in order for the antitrust case to be filed. Reggie White is the named plaintiff the case is often associate with, but it was filed on behalf of all current and future players. In that case, White and the four other named plaintiffs alleged that a number of labor practices in the NFL violated antitrust law: the correct of initial refusal, the college draft system and the regular NFL contract, to name a few.
The White case was filed soon after the players association decertified and was not closed until April 1993. There was no formal ruling on the issues since the two sides came to an agreement that was entered as a consent decree to close the case. That agreement stated that all future disputes would be heard by an appointed Special Master with the District Court for the District of Minnesota having the right to review. (As a side note, this is what just happened with the recently decided tv case – the Special Master ruled mostly in favor of the owners and then District Court Judge Doty reviewed his decision and ruled in favor of the players. This is where significantly of the players’ leverage and confidence came from the past couple of weeks. Also, it’s why every thing is having to be filed in Minnesota.)
Shortly right after the White case was settled, the players association reorganized and entered into a collective bargaining agreement with the league that mirrored the settlement agreement.
There have been other antitrust claims against the league, but these three give you a basis for understanding the current case.
What labor practices does this lawsuit claim violate antitrust laws? In this case, they have focused on the lockout, the college player entry draft, the salary cap and no cost agency restrictions.
Do the players have a good case? 1 of the stronger arguments the players will have is against the salary cap. They’ll be able to point to the 2010 season, played with no salary cap, and show that the league survived (and possibly even thrived) without 1. In order to refute it, the owners will have to provide financials showing losses they blame on the lack of a salary cap. This may very well get the players some of the monetary information they had been looking for.