More

NFL, Players Take Labor Fight To Court

Nfl Players Court

DAVE CAMPBELL   04/ 6/11 11:16 PM ET   AP

ST. PAUL, Minn. — As she wrapped up the five-hour hearing on the legality of the NFL lockout, the federal judge overseeing the case said she'd take "a couple of weeks" to rule on the players' request to return to work.

U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson, however, urged the two sides not to wait that long.

"It seems to me both sides are at risk, and now is a good time to come back to the table," Nelson said, noting her willingness to facilitate the resumption of talks toward a new collective bargaining agreement that would put pro football back on track.

Owners and players failed to reach that goal last month, leading to the decertification of the union, the lockout of the players and the antitrust lawsuit against the owners filed here by the players.

But the two sides don't agree on much these days.

James Quinn, an attorney for the players, said they'd "listen carefully" to Nelson's recommendation. But David Boies, a lawyer for the league, hedged when asked about Nelson's offer to supervise talks.

"We don't need a settlement of this lawsuit," Boies said. "What we need is a collective bargaining agreement so that players can go on playing and the league can put on games. Until we have that, we're not going to make any progress."

The injunction request – a plea to the judge that the lockout be immediately lifted on the grounds that their careers are being irreparably harmed – was the sole purpose of Wednesday's hearing.

The court appearance was the first round – call it the first quarter – between the NFL and the players in their legal fight over the future of the $9 billion business and the 2011 season.

Teams of attorneys from both sides, officials from the now-dissolved union, several NFL players and dozens of reporters crowded the courtroom, but little was accomplished other than the formal launch of the legal process.

Boies argued that the court shouldn't have jurisdiction while the National Labor Relations Board is considering an unfair labor charge filed by the league that players didn't negotiate in good faith. The NFL's contention is that the union's decertification was a tactical maneuver and that it has the legal right to keep players from working.

Boies claimed players are still acting like a union, that the NFL Players' Association is funding the litigation and has set up other services for the players as if it were a fully formed labor entity. DeMaurice Smith, the head of the NFLPA, attended the hearing, and the players, lawyers and union officials arrived and departed together in a bus.

"They're financing this lawsuit," Boies said. "They're saying, 'We're no longer a collective bargaining agent, but we're going to continue to do all these things.'"

Quinn dismissed the accusation that the decertification was a sham, pointing to unanimous participation in a player vote to approve the move.

"It's not some kind of tactic. It's the law," Quinn said. "It's what we're allowed to do."

Plaintiffs Mike Vrabel, Ben Leber, Vincent Jackson, Brian Robison and Von Miller were joined in court by veterans Tony Richardson and Charlie Batch, members of the union's executive committee prior to dissolution. Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees, the three highest profile players named on the lawsuit, did not attend.

Hall of Famer Carl Eller, the lead plaintiff in a separate, similar case filed by retirees, former players and rookies, was also present. Nelson approved a motion to consolidate those cases, and attorney Michael Hausfeld – on behalf of the Eller group – took turns with Quinn arguing against and rebutting Boies.

Nelson listened to arguments from lawyers for the players and the league Wednesday, asking questions often and speaking politely but directly while acknowledging her difficulty discerning which components of the laws apply to this complicated case.

She expressed some frustration trying to understand some of the arguments, mostly those made by Boies, but oversaw a cordial process, telling the two sides they did an "outstanding job." Both sides praised Nelson afterward for her thorough approach and intelligent questions.

As she began the hearing, she urged both sides to stick to the issue of the injunction and not delve into the evidence presented previously in their briefs since all parties are up to speed on the information.

"You can assure that the court has done nothing else in the last few weeks," Nelson said.

When she reveals her decision, the winner would have leverage whenever talks resume on a new CBA. However, that ruling will all but likely be appealed. She could also defer a decision until after the NLRB rules, which could take months, or declare the need to schedule another hearing to consider the evidence in the case before she rules.

That would be a loss for the players.

"All of this is delay so they want to put pressure on us," Quinn said.

Boies said factual disagreements – regarding the existence of the union, for one – prove the necessity of another hearing. Boies took roughly double the amount of time to talk than the lawyers for the players did, in part because he was pressed so much by Nelson as she tried to grasp the argument that she has no jurisdiction.

The NFL says a union can't just "flick a light switch" and decertify to their liking. The two sides spent a long time arguing over the Norris-LaGuardia Act, Depression-era legislation meant to protect workers from a federal judge's ability to stop a strike.

Quinn pointed to the irony of owners using that to defend a lockout, and Nelson agreed. She sounded firm in her belief that the decertification is legal, pointing to court precedent in the last antitrust suit filed by players in the early 1990s.

"It's a big risk on their part and they lose a lot by doing it," she said.

But Boies cautioned afterward against reading too far into the scrutiny.

"I've been doing this for 45 years, and I've never been able to figure out from a judge's questions exactly where they're coming from," he said.

___

AP Sports Writer Jon Krawczynski contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST SPORTS

ST. PAUL, Minn. — As she wrapped up the five-hour hearing on the legality of the NFL lockout, the federal judge overseeing the case said she'd take "a couple of weeks" to rule on the players' re...
ST. PAUL, Minn. — As she wrapped up the five-hour hearing on the legality of the NFL lockout, the federal judge overseeing the case said she'd take "a couple of weeks" to rule on the players' re...
Filed by Michael Klopman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 20
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:26 PM on 04/06/2011
It's funny that in Football, the most American of American sports, the players have collective bargaining rights, yet teachers don't.
photo
gditty
My micro-bio is updated and pending approval
01:16 PM on 04/06/2011
If they don't sort this out before the season starts, I predict a massive amount of divorces filed.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
logicanada
Blogger, radio co-host, writer, editor, voice-over
12:45 PM on 04/06/2011
All those poor fans who will get so sick from a lack of tailgate parties and beery Sunday afternoons. And healthcare is so darned expensive . . .
photo
crankyCrackPot
Don't judge a book by its movie
12:40 PM on 04/06/2011
We've had season seats in my family since the Polo grounds.
I was there on opening day for Giants stadium and the ugly fan to owner cash transference thing that they call the New Meadowlands Arena.
For the last 30 years we sat on the 50 yard line 11 rows up from the Giants Bench. I knew all the people who sat near us, and often their grandparents and grandchildren.

Whiling telling the fans that they should celebrate our new stadium... They wanted $700 per seat per game after a $20,000 PSL which can be be taken away by the team at any time.

My new seats are now in the upper deck and they are horrible, we are so far away from the field I can't believe we are at the same game.

Furthermore, I live 20 minutes from the stadium but it takes over an hour to get into the stadium and around 3 hours to get home.
The same home where I have a 46" wide screen TV with great football coverage, a loving wife, cold beer in the fridge and my own private bathroom.

It's that time of the year again to pony up... we are having discussions that would have been sacrilegious only a few years ago.

The only thing wrong with the old stadium is that a new stadium makes the owner more money...
For the first time in 40 years tho, it may not come from me.
02:26 PM on 04/06/2011
You have a right to be cranky. Yours is the only action that will get their attention. Are these people crazy? They are killing the golden goose.
thekid360
Black, Union and Proud, Booyah
12:30 PM on 04/06/2011
In collective bargaining if you are allowed to say we cannot afford this contract and therefore we are
seeking concessions in order to continue to operate as a viable entity. The rules have always been if you want to cry poverty, then open your books. If the players negotiation team go back to the players with a proposal that calls for concessions without any proof , they would be ran out as they should be. It's called bargaining in good faith, something that is totally missing from the owners side. After all they are $1 billion a part, a pretty big figure in my opinion.
12:25 PM on 04/06/2011
When did the blame fall on the players, who want to play under the conditions of the agreed-upon CBA? The owners want to change the terms of the CBA to include another 1 billion off the top and two more games to the schedule. This, from the same league that all of a sudden cared about "player safety" half way through last season. Should there be a rookie pay scale? Yes. Should there be 18 games? No. The season is watered down enough already with many games at the end of the season being "meaningless" for playoff implications.

What is it with people blaming labor in this country? Because someone bargained for a good deal we blame them? How about the owners that, of their own free will, paid the guy? If you were in the players shoes, would you not go for the big payday if you could? We leave jobs all the time because someone will pay us more, why is the NFL any different? Unbelievable.
01:21 PM on 04/06/2011
I can't think of any other industry in United States where the owners contribute less to the product or services they provide than the professional sports leagues.
photo
75thRanger
Though I Be The Lone Survivor
12:20 PM on 04/06/2011
Good grief...........sort this out!

RLTW
12:12 PM on 04/06/2011
I started out pretty neutral in this debate but I don't really understand player's argument here. No one is legally entitled to work at the job they want to work at. After all I'd love to be a swim suit model but it ain't gonna happen. That doesn't mean I can sue Sports Illustrated for not putting me on their cover.

True, the NFL is the biggest fish in the pond but it is NOT the only professional football operation around. The other options might not be as appealing and Lord knows they won't pay as well but guess what - that isn't our problem. And hey, I hear McDonald's is hiring.

The players may have a right to work but they don't have the right to work at whatever job they want at whatever salary they want. Most of Americans right now are taking what they can get and doing their best with it. How does being able to throw a ball really well make you above that?
11:24 AM on 04/06/2011
I was a huge football fan. But with the state of the economy, the two sides are fighting like children over a toy. I am no longer a NFL fan. If the redskins ever get to the superbowl again, I might watch it. otherwise I am done, and the nfl and its players will not get anymore of my money!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
tibetanterrier
reirretnatebit
11:10 AM on 04/06/2011
anybody want to arm wrestle for .50c.. a gov. shutdown looming and here i am reading about giants fighting goliaths.. what the heck is wrong with me, i mean them.
11:29 AM on 04/06/2011
Don't click on the story and certainly don't take the time to comment.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
tibetanterrier
reirretnatebit
11:47 AM on 04/06/2011
i guess you miss the obsession part.. ya giving centrist a bad name
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jazmo
Cause they're hip to the bull and hip to the lies.
11:41 AM on 04/06/2011
The rich want to get richer.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
FunkSands
Baby shoes for sale, never worn.
11:03 AM on 04/06/2011
Average football player's career lasts 3.5 years.  Excuse them for wanting to understand why the owners want them to play two more games a year.
 
And how are the owners doing so poorly financially in the most profitable sports league in the history of ever?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Quasi Libertarian
Sometimes you get the bear, sometimes it gets you
10:34 AM on 04/06/2011
Why doesn't the Owner and and the Union just tell how much more the fans will have to shell out for everyone's pay raise and be done with it........
10:13 AM on 04/06/2011
Fan's want cheaper seats! That's all they care about!!$$!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TXconfidnz
Schpelling Bea Regect
10:11 AM on 04/06/2011
Millionaires vs Billionaires
09:40 AM on 04/06/2011
queue the circus music.