Question:

NFLPA launches a renewed media campaign on the labour dispute

by  |  earlier

0 LIKES UnLike

NFLPA launches a renewed media campaign on the labour dispute
The regular season was a nail biter with a few playoff berths being settled in the very last games of the season. The games themselves were exciting and a controversy or two (thank you Brett Favre and Rex Ryan) were thrown into
the mix to create an all-encompassing entertainment package that kept the fans tuned in. Surprisingly, the playoffs have had higher ratings this year than they have had in decades.
It is no surprise then that the labour dispute between the NFL and the players union has been neglected for the most part. Fans want to see the games and that is all the football they can take. The politics, the legal and financial
wrangling, the back and forth accusations while fun in their own right, just do not compare to the energy of football, which is a bad thing if you ask the players association.
The league has all the good cards and has an advantage over the union in these negotiations. Not to mention, what the union calls ‘lockout insurance.’ NFL owners have entered into multibillion-dollar agreements with media groups
that would guarantee a flow of revenue even in the event of a lockout. However, the players would get nothing.
The fans cannot associate with either side of the dispute. It is after all a dispute between millionaires and billionaires and the average Joe struggling to pay the rent finds it hard to sympathize with either side. The union realized
that long ago and tried to paint the dispute in a different light. In the regular season, the players association launched a media campaign with a focus on the economic impact of a lockout on the US economy. It argued that in addition to the players going
without a salary, each city with an NFL team stands to lose hundreds of millions of dollars if no games are played in 2011. The total of lost revenue, the NFLPA argued, would hence go into billions.
The union sent letters to government officials and elected representatives in an effort to put pressure on the owners. However, that did not work out too well because the excitement of the regular season drowned their voice.
The NFL did not ideally stand by either. They countered that the billions they would get from the so-called lockout insurance would have to be paid back, with interest, if no games were played. They also questioned the economic
impact of a lockout and accused the players association of fabricating numbers to scare the public in tough economic times. The back and forth between the league continued and no progress was made on the collective bargaining agreement.
The union resorted to measures that were more effective and challenged the NFL in court. The players association accused the league of signing media contracts for less than what they were worth. The union says that the owners were
in violation of the CBA because they are obligated to negotiate such deals in good faith to maximize revenue, which is shared between the league and the players.
Pending the decision of a special master on that case, the union has stepped up the pressure on the league in the form of an hour-long press conference. While the union’s representatives were present, the focus was on Baltimore
Ravens cornerback Dominique Foxworth and Cleveland Browns linebacker Scott Fujita. When a man named George Atallah appeared in a perfect suit on TV and spoke out for the players, the effect was not the same as when the players raised the issues themselves.
The two men were on a mission and the objective was simple - make sure that the fans know the owners are forcing a lockout. Fujita tried to paint a gloomy picture when he spoke about pregnant wives of players coming up to him and
asking if they should induce labour while the collective bargaining agreement is in place and they still have medical insurance.
Now, if that does not earn you sympathy, nothing will. Let us just make sure that no one points out the fact that players continue to have the same health benefits in the case of a lockout, thanks to the COBRA act of 1985. They
just have to pay the premiums themselves. Block out that fact right now and lets all shed a tear for the players.
 

 Tags:

   Report
SIMILAR QUESTIONS

Question Stats

Latest activity: earlier.
This question has 0 answers.

BECOME A GUIDE

Share your knowledge and help people by answering questions.