Bears players can't work out at Halas

Bears players can't work out at Halas

By Jeff Dickerson
ESPNChicago.com

Chicago Bears kicker Robbie Gould, who served as the team's union player representative before decertification on March 11, reported to Halas Hall on Tuesday morning but was unable to access the team's workout facilities.

All you can do if you show up today as a player is to basically tour the facility," Gould told ESPNChicago.com Tuesday morning. "I first went to the training room and all the trainers were there, but they placed a call to [Bears contract negotiator] Cliff Stein, who came downstairs from his office to inform me that I could not work out until clarification comes from the judge's ruling."

U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson granted the players' request for an injunction to lift the lockout on Monday, ending the NFL's work stoppage in its 45th day but prompting an immediate notice from the league that it will appeal.

"I spoke to both Stein and team president Ted Phillips, and they claimed the reason players won't be able to work out is because of fiscal liability," Gould said. "They just don't want to run the financial risk of anyone getting hurt."

The locker room was locked, and players are being pulled into the cafeteria and being informed they can't work out at the facility, Gould said.

"Even though there's all this talk the lockout has been lifted, they're still not letting us work out," Gould said.

Players told to show up ready for work -- or workouts -- on Tuesday.

"We have received inquiry from a number of players and agents. We have simply responded and told them we don't see anything wrong with it," NFL Players Association spokesman George Atallah said in a text message to The Associated Press. "Players are organizing stuff on their own."

Jeff Dickerson covers the Bears for ESPNChicago.com and ESPN 1000. Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

More than anything, this affects all the players like gould,url , peppers and cutler with big "offseason workout bonuses" of 100K to 500K,,,by showing up, even if not allowed to workout, do they get their bonuses?.. i'd guess a judge will ultimately have to decide this issue.

This is pretty simple really. There is an injunction against the lockout so the players showed up for work as they are entitled to do since there was not stay of the injunction from Judge Nelson's court. Therefore the owners are in violation of a court order which allows players who are under contract to return to work.

Since offseason training includes those workouts and teams even compensate players additional sums for participating the owners are violating Judge Nelson's order by refusing to let those players do so. Under those circumastances the teams will still be liable for paying the workout bonuses specified in each players contract since it it they who are preventing participation not the player refusing to
participate.

I'm getting really sick of the bullshit way this whole thing is being played out. Goodell's last public statement following the Judge's decision was the biggest load of horse crap I've seen come from him yet. That guy would discredit the "Virgin Mary" if the owners asked him to do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

This is pretty simple really. There is an injunction against the lockout so the players showed up for work as they are entitled to do since there was not stay of the injunction from Judge Nelson's court. Therefore the owners are in violation of a court order which allows players who are under contract to return to work.

Since offseason training includes those workouts and teams even compensate players additional sums for participating the owners are violating Judge Nelson's order by refusing to let those players do so. Under those circumastances the teams will still be liable for paying the workout bonuses specified in each players contract since it it they who are preventing participation not the player refusing to
participate.

I'm getting really sick of the bullshit way this whole thing is being played out. Goodell's last public statement following the Judge's decision was the biggest load of horse crap I've seen come from him yet. That guy would discredit the "Virgin Mary" if the owners asked him to do it.

---

not versed on workman's comp laws and/or insurance requirements... Which may play alot into opening doors ,but not allowing workout's in the team's facilities today, or until have both state and insurance coverages soul.. Personally feel BOTH SIDES being childish and foolish not just the teams.. and to expect 12 hours after an 'initial" ruling to have all things ironed out just not reasonable

This is turning ugly very quickly.

The owners are simply standing around confused and shocked that they lost the court case. They look idiotic that they were not preparing for this. Between this most recent incident and the fact they tried to screw the players with the lockout TV money I am swinging to support the players.

This is going to get worse before it gets better.

Bears' Phillips: Teams seeking 'clarification'



By Brad Biggs Tribune reporter
Chicago Bears president Ted Phillips declined to call Monday’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson that lifted the lockout imposed by the NFL as a setback for the league.

Three players showed up at Halas Hall on Tuesday morning and then defensive tackle Anthony Adams and right tackle J’Marcus Webb arrived for the annual Piccolo Awards ceremony, an event planned well in advance. It’s a bizarre day in the NFL as players can show up at team facilities, but workouts are being prohibited.

Popular belief is the ruling by Nelson was a significant victory for players. The NFL is seeking a stay that would continue the lockout until an appeal is heard. Players have until 9 a.m. Wednesday to reply to the NFL’s request for an expedited motion.

“Right now, we just want some clarification when the league year will start and what’s going to happen going forward,” Phillips said when asked if Nelson’s ruling was a setback for clubs. “That’s really all I can tell you right now.

“Right now I think the league, the clubs and the players too are all looking for some clarification, some additional rulings from the judge. When that happens we’ll re-address the situation and see where we go.”

There has to be some concern by all parties that the NFL’s labor mess could ultimately harm everyone involved -- from the owners on down to the players and everyone in between. Phillips sidestepped that issue.

“Ultimately, the collective bargaining agreement needs to get resolved,” he said. “That’s going to happen when both sides sit down at the bargaining table and hash it out. That’s what we’re looking forward to.”

The two sides are not scheduled to have a mediated session until May 16. There will be court action before then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabears54

not versed on workman's comp laws and/or insurance requirements... Which may play alot into opening doors ,but not allowing workout's in the team's facilities today, or until have both state and insurance coverages soul.. Personally feel BOTH SIDES being childish and foolish not just the teams.. and to expect 12 hours after an 'initial" ruling to have all things ironed out just not reasonable

---

Workmens comp will resume the minute that players are back on the job in the full employ of the team. I doubt any team dropped the umbrella liability coverage for their employees since many have still been working throughout the lockout. At best maybe their insurer offered a reduced premium for reduced coverage while the lockout was in force but that would typically end just as soon as the players returned to work.

I think the players were acting childish when they disbanded the union and walked away from the negotiating table but the owners selfishness and arrogance had a great deal to do with that. Now it's the owners who are acting childish by dragging their feet over lifting the lockout and looking for holds, stays, clarification, and anything else they can use to legitimately drag their feet on compliance. It's like, "it's my house and you can't come in to play until I say you can, so there". Nanny, nanny, boo, boo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Workmens comp will resume the minute that players are back on the job in the full employ of the team. I doubt any team dropped the umbrella liability coverage for their employees since many have still been working throughout the lockout. At best maybe their insurer offered a reduced premium for reduced coverage while the lockout was in force but that would typically end just as soon as the players returned to work.

I think the players were acting childish when they disbanded the union and walked away from the negotiating table but the owners selfishness and arrogance had a great deal to do with that. Now it's the owners who are acting childish by dragging their feet over lifting the lockout and looking for holds, stays, clarification, and anything else they can use to legitimately drag their feet on compliance. It's like, "it's my house and you can't come in to play until I say you can, so there". Nanny, nanny, boo, boo.

---

Exactly! And this wanting clarification from Judge Nelson, I think her written ruling is quite clear and any clarification as to the start of team workouts, training camp and the season has to come from the league not her. None of this should prevent a player from going to his place of employment and begin to work ie the weight room or the practice field or any other place he would normal do his job. The lockout was lifted period and Judge Nelson has not ruled on a stay until an appellate court can rule on the case, so players should be allowed to conduct business as usual until either a stay is issued by Judge Nelson or until the appellate court over rules the lower courts decision. I agree that teams are in violation of Judge Nelson's ruling and violating their employees rights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Workmens comp will resume the minute that players are back on the job in the full employ of the team. I doubt any team dropped the umbrella liability coverage for their employees since many have still been working throughout the lockout. At best maybe their insurer offered a reduced premium for reduced coverage while the lockout was in force but that would typically end just as soon as the players returned to work.

I think the players were acting childish when they disbanded the union and walked away from the negotiating table but the owners selfishness and arrogance had a great deal to do with that. Now it's the owners who are acting childish by dragging their feet over lifting the lockout and looking for holds, stays, clarification, and anything else they can use to legitimately drag their feet on compliance. It's like, "it's my house and you can't come in to play until I say you can, so there". Nanny, nanny, boo, boo.

---

As keep saying Soul, think this is just a "set up" and as Sun-Tzu said sometimes better to lose a battle to win a war. Think the league is forcing the Judge's hand and want her to rule on all the boundries and clarifications, before opening fully, and as many suspect, she will rule that the league year starts at "X"( be it tommorrow, friday, next week etc)..and because she isn't familiar or not her expertise to change the rules, she will make them open year , based on last years rules and clarification for simplicity and 'status quo".. which then the union, when realizes screwed out of roughly $1.6 billion in revenue and new contracts( again 270+ F/A go back to RFA) and lower revenue teams can again go way below what would be a cap floor again- the owner's then will just rase hands and say to the union, "just doing what you wanted and got in court"....Do not think its any kind of a "nanny nanny boo" thing, but a smart legal stragety to back the union into a corner they arrogantly do not see coming and as usual so about the "win" they aren't lookign past what it actually means, and the teams want the court to put it in writing before lowering the hammer and having it ruled different

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thekmann

Exactly! And this wanting clarification from Judge Nelson, I think her written ruling is quite clear and any clarification as to the start of team workouts, training camp and the season has to come from the league not her. None of this should prevent a player from going to his place of employment and begin to work ie the weight room or the practice field or any other place he would normal do his job. The lockout was lifted period and Judge Nelson has not ruled on a stay until an appellate court can rule on the case, so players should be allowed to conduct business as usual until either a stay is issued by Judge Nelson or until the appellate court over rules the lower courts decision. I agree that teams are in violation of Judge Nelson's ruling and violating their employees rights.

---

thproblem k-man, is the NFL not a normal business, where you punch in and get paid daily, and when doors open your wages start accuring and paychecks go out. By 'lifting the lockout", you have to ALSO have the rules and procedures in place to open a business( think of it like inspections for equiptment in a plant)- IE is there a salary cap for teams or not?.. Are players "X" and "Y" free agents or still part of team for 2011, can we let player "X" in our facility becuase he's a member of the team? Or as a 5 year player is he now a free agent, and thus not covered for liability by team- so he can't be there? an obviously as a f/a we don't want him knowing 2011 stuff..

Does the clock start today on Offseason workout's? and players that make $100K-$1 mill in these bonuses( and need a 85% attendance record) when EXACTLY does the 2011 season offically start? until have these answers, understand why teams ae reluctant or will just have more lawsuits and waste more fee's in lawyers if everyone isn't on the same pge, and NOTHING in her 89 page brief addressed thse issues or the day to day operations.. and as we already know, BOTH sides can't agree on crap- so can't leave these issues until later