Thread: Breaking News, Judge Nelson says lift Lockout

Here's a bit more on the same. The owners are asking her to delay the injunction in order to get a clarification. No surprise there huh? They got more foot dragging techniques than a four year old who was told to get to bed. He decision is in plain English guys. You need to lift the lockout and open for business. You guys are pissing me off a lot more than the players are.

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/New...?story_id=7790

April 26, 2011
Judge gives NFL a day to refile ruling clarification request


By: NFL.com Wire Reports | Last Updated: 4/26/2011 2:23 PM

The NFL is a long way from playing football.

One confusing day after a federal judge ended a 45-day lockout, small groups of players showed up at team facilities Tuesday -- let inside but told they would not be allowed to work out. Most left in a matter of minutes on a strange day with more questions than answers and the judge said she will take at least another day to consider whether she should put her order on hold.
U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson in Minneapolis has given the league until 6 p.m. ET Wednesday to resubmit a request for a clarification on her ruling Monday that lifted the lockout. The league previously had filed expedited an motion for a stay. The stay would put Nelson's decision on hold pending further appeals. Nelson lifted the lockout on Monday, ending the NFL's work stoppage in its 45th day.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Tuesday morning that the league will continue operating as is. "We are going to proceed in an orderly way that is fair to the teams and players and complies with court orders," Aiello said. "Players are being treated with courtesy and respect at club facilities. "We do not believe it is appropriate for football activities to take place until there are further rulings from the court. Under the last set of proposals made to the NFLPA, teams wouldn't even be into offseason programs yet. We need a few days to sort this out, as NFLPA attorney Jim Quinn indicated last night." Little was clear as both sides essentially made up the rules as they went along.

"It's very chaotic for the teams right now," agent Drew Rosenhaus said. "It's not chaotic for the players. Our position is the lockout is over, free agency should begin, signings should begin, offseason workouts should begin, everything should be going on. The longer the NFL doesn't do that and drags this out, the more there are concerns of collusion and violations of antitrust." Tennessee Titans guard Jake Scott, his team's player representative for the now-dissolved union, spoke to senior executive vice president Steve Underwood and left his team's headquarters 10 minutes later.

Scott said he was told no staff was available to meet with players. This for a team with a new head coach, too, in Mike Munchak.
After Nelson lifted the lockout Monday, writing in an 89-page order that she believed it is causing "irreparable harm" to the players, the NFL questioned whether she had exceeded her jurisdiction, and said it would seek an immediate stay of her ruling as well as relief from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis. But if her injunction is upheld -- by the judge herself or the appellate court -- the NFL must resume business in some fashion. It could invoke the 2010 rules for free agency, meaning players would need six seasons of service before becoming unrestricted free agents when their contracts expire; previously, it was four years. The requirement for restricted free agents would be four years rather than the three years before 2010. There also was no salary cap in 2010, meaning teams could spend as much -- or as little -- as they wanted.

"We're evolving as a league," Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said at his team's pre-draft news conference Tuesday afternoon. "We've asked for some hearings, asked for some rulings from the exiting judge ... as well as anticipating going to the appellate area, and that might make a difference in how we look to sign free agents in the immediate future. "I can't answer (how we'll approach free agency) in relation to the specific ruling yesterday. At some point we'll play, and we'll have had the opportunity to sign veteran free agents and college free agents." All of this was in the background for the NFL draft, which begins at 8 p.m. ET Thursday night. The draft has a decidedly weird feel as teams prep for picks without free agency or the ability to swap personnel. Jim Quinn, an attorney for the players, said the pressure is on the league. "They better act quickly, because as of right now there's no stay and, presumably, players could sign with teams," Quinn said. "There are no guidelines as of right now, so they have to put something in place quickly."

Nelson's ruling was another rebuke of the NFL in the federal courts in Minnesota, which was established years ago as the venue for the league's collective bargaining system. Three weeks ago, NFL attorney David Boies suggested to Nelson that she shouldn't have jurisdiction over a dispute with an unfair bargaining accusation against the players pending with the National Labor Relations Board.
In her ruling, Nelson rejected that contention and recognized the NFLPA's decision to "de-unionize" as legitimate because it has "serious consequences" for the players.

Nelson even referenced her colleague, U.S. District Judge David Doty, who has frequently ruled for the players in the past. Not only did she declare that players are likely to suffer harm from the lockout, a legal requirement for granting the injunction, Nelson wrote they're already feeling the hurt now. Nelson cited their short careers, arguing that monetary damages wouldn't be enough relief. What Nelson didn't do, however, was tackle the issue of the antitrust lawsuit filed last month when the union decertified. That, she wrote, "must wait another day."

In an opinion piece posted late Monday on the Wall Street Journal's website, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell wrote that Nelson's ruling "may significantly alter professional football as we know it. ... By blessing this negotiating tactic (recognizing the players' right to dissolve their union), the decision may endanger one of the most popular and successful sports leagues in history." Owners imposed the lockout after talks broke down last month and the players disbanded their union. Nelson heard arguments on the injunction at an April 6 hearing and ordered the two sides to resume mediation while she was considering her decision. The owners and players, who failed to reach consensus after 16 days of mediated talks earlier this year, met over four days with a federal magistrate but didn't announce any progress on solving the impasse.

They aren't scheduled to meet again until May 16, four days after Doty holds a hearing on whether players should receive damages in their related fight with owners over some $4 billion in broadcast revenue. With appeals expected, the fight seems likely to drag on through the spring. The closer it gets to August, when training camps and the preseason are normally in full swing, the more likely it becomes that regular-season games could be lost. In a statement, the NFL expressed confidence in its appeal.

"But we also believe that this dispute will inevitably end with a collective bargaining agreement, which would be in the best interests of players, clubs and fans," the NFL said. "We can reach a fair agreement only if we continue negotiations toward that goal."
NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith said players were eager to resume court-ordered mediation to resolve the fight.
"My hope is really is that there's somebody on the other side who loves football as much as our players and fans do," he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Originally Posted by thekmann

No you are right Soul, I was thrown off by DB's reply to my original post in that I didn't think that the NFL had a leg to stand on in bringing the case to an Appellate court to overrule judge Nelson's decision. He then replied showing me the premise that the NFL believes federal law bars injunction in labor disputes and that they believe that Nelson's court didn't have jurisdiction in the case. This is where I made the mistake in assuming that based on the NFL's basis for filing an appeal based on the facts of them saying her court didn't have jurisdiction and that federal law prohibits injunctions in labor disputes that she (Nelson) must be a State judge and we were getting into another Star Caps mess.
Now that I know she is a Federal judge I stand on my original premise that the NFL doesn't have a leg to stand on and unless judge Nelson made a serious error in her ruling I feel that the appellate court most likely wont even hear this case and if they do it's very unlikely they will overturn judge Nelson's ruling. For us fans it's a win because the 2011 season is a go but under the 2010 rules which hurts the players in the long run so maybe this will make negotiations proceed in a more timely fashion and all this posturing by both sides will now come to an end. One can only hope.

Agreed kmann. She has already made this decision that a Federal Court jurisdiction has precedence over the NLRB in this dispute and she officially recognized the disbanding of the union as being legal and not a sham. Her reasoning included the fact that the players have and may continue to suffer as a result of that. I think the NFL's bringing the Norris-LaGuardia Act in on their side of the case was a bad play on their part. That law was enacted to protect employees against unfair labor practices by an employer, not vise versa. She almost seemed amused when it was introduced.

Despite 54's contention that the 8th Circuit Courts is pro-business where the 8th District Court was not and I believe that there's less than a 50% chance that they will overrule her however, they may send it back for some clarification and suggest the imposition of limitations.

Originally Posted by soulman

Here's a bit more on the same. The owners are asking her to delay the injunction in order to get a clarification. No surprise there huh? They got more foot dragging techniques than a four year old who was told to get to bed. He decision is in plain English guys. You need to lift the lockout and open for business. You guys are pissing me off a lot more than the players are.

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/New...?story_id=7790

April 26, 2011
Judge gives NFL a day to refile ruling clarification request


By: NFL.com Wire Reports | Last Updated: 4/26/2011 2:23 PM



The NFL is a long way from playing football.

One confusing day after a federal judge ended a 45-day lockout, small groups of players showed up at team facilities Tuesday -- let inside but told they would not be allowed to work out. Most left in a matter of minutes on a strange day with more questions than answers and the judge said she will take at least another day to consider whether she should put her order on hold.
U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson in Minneapolis has given the league until 6 p.m. ET Wednesday to resubmit a request for a clarification on her ruling Monday that lifted the lockout. The league previously had filed expedited an motion for a stay. The stay would put Nelson's decision on hold pending further appeals. Nelson lifted the lockout on Monday, ending the NFL's work stoppage in its 45th day.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Tuesday morning that the league will continue operating as is. "We are going to proceed in an orderly way that is fair to the teams and players and complies with court orders," Aiello said. "Players are being treated with courtesy and respect at club facilities. "We do not believe it is appropriate for football activities to take place until there are further rulings from the court. Under the last set of proposals made to the NFLPA, teams wouldn't even be into offseason programs yet. We need a few days to sort this out, as NFLPA attorney Jim Quinn indicated last night." Little was clear as both sides essentially made up the rules as they went along.

"It's very chaotic for the teams right now," agent Drew Rosenhaus said. "It's not chaotic for the players. Our position is the lockout is over, free agency should begin, signings should begin, offseason workouts should begin, everything should be going on. The longer the NFL doesn't do that and drags this out, the more there are concerns of collusion and violations of antitrust." Tennessee Titans guard Jake Scott, his team's player representative for the now-dissolved union, spoke to senior executive vice president Steve Underwood and left his team's headquarters 10 minutes later.

Scott said he was told no staff was available to meet with players. This for a team with a new head coach, too, in Mike Munchak.
After Nelson lifted the lockout Monday, writing in an 89-page order that she believed it is causing "irreparable harm" to the players, the NFL questioned whether she had exceeded her jurisdiction, and said it would seek an immediate stay of her ruling as well as relief from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis. But if her injunction is upheld -- by the judge herself or the appellate court -- the NFL must resume business in some fashion. It could invoke the 2010 rules for free agency, meaning players would need six seasons of service before becoming unrestricted free agents when their contracts expire; previously, it was four years. The requirement for restricted free agents would be four years rather than the three years before 2010. There also was no salary cap in 2010, meaning teams could spend as much -- or as little -- as they wanted.

"We're evolving as a league," Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said at his team's pre-draft news conference Tuesday afternoon. "We've asked for some hearings, asked for some rulings from the exiting judge ... as well as anticipating going to the appellate area, and that might make a difference in how we look to sign free agents in the immediate future. "I can't answer (how we'll approach free agency) in relation to the specific ruling yesterday. At some point we'll play, and we'll have had the opportunity to sign veteran free agents and college free agents." All of this was in the background for the NFL draft, which begins at 8 p.m. ET Thursday night. The draft has a decidedly weird feel as teams prep for picks without free agency or the ability to swap personnel. Jim Quinn, an attorney for the players, said the pressure is on the league. "They better act quickly, because as of right now there's no stay and, presumably, players could sign with teams," Quinn said. "There are no guidelines as of right now, so they have to put something in place quickly."

Nelson's ruling was another rebuke of the NFL in the federal courts in Minnesota, which was established years ago as the venue for the league's collective bargaining system. Three weeks ago, NFL attorney David Boies suggested to Nelson that she shouldn't have jurisdiction over a dispute with an unfair bargaining accusation against the players pending with the National Labor Relations Board.
In her ruling, Nelson rejected that contention and recognized the NFLPA's decision to "de-unionize" as legitimate because it has "serious consequences" for the players.

Nelson even referenced her colleague, U.S. District Judge David Doty, who has frequently ruled for the players in the past. Not only did she declare that players are likely to suffer harm from the lockout, a legal requirement for granting the injunction, Nelson wrote they're already feeling the hurt now. Nelson cited their short careers, arguing that monetary damages wouldn't be enough relief. What Nelson didn't do, however, was tackle the issue of the antitrust lawsuit filed last month when the union decertified. That, she wrote, "must wait another day."

In an opinion piece posted late Monday on the Wall Street Journal's website, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell wrote that Nelson's ruling "may significantly alter professional football as we know it. ... By blessing this negotiating tactic (recognizing the players' right to dissolve their union), the decision may endanger one of the most popular and successful sports leagues in history." Owners imposed the lockout after talks broke down last month and the players disbanded their union. Nelson heard arguments on the injunction at an April 6 hearing and ordered the two sides to resume mediation while she was considering her decision. The owners and players, who failed to reach consensus after 16 days of mediated talks earlier this year, met over four days with a federal magistrate but didn't announce any progress on solving the impasse.

They aren't scheduled to meet again until May 16, four days after Doty holds a hearing on whether players should receive damages in their related fight with owners over some $4 billion in broadcast revenue. With appeals expected, the fight seems likely to drag on through the spring. The closer it gets to August, when training camps and the preseason are normally in full swing, the more likely it becomes that regular-season games could be lost. In a statement, the NFL expressed confidence in its appeal.

"But we also believe that this dispute will inevitably end with a collective bargaining agreement, which would be in the best interests of players, clubs and fans," the NFL said. "We can reach a fair agreement only if we continue negotiations toward that goal."
NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith said players were eager to resume court-ordered mediation to resolve the fight.
"My hope is really is that there's somebody on the other side who loves football as much as our players and fans do," he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

While I am on the side of the players in the situation, that is as blatant an act of political propaganda as you will find. It's disgusting.

Originally Posted by soulman

Agreed kmann. She has already made this decision that a Federal Court jurisdiction has precedence over the NLRB in this dispute and she officially recognized the disbanding of the union as being legal and not a sham. Her reasoning included the fact that the players have and may continue to suffer as a result of that. I think the NFL's bringing the Norris-LaGuardia Act in on their side of the case was a bad play on their part. That law was enacted to protect employees against unfair labor practices by an employer, not vise versa. She almost seemed amused when it was introduced.

Despite 54's contention that the 8th Circuit Courts is pro-business where the 8th District Court was not and I believe that there's less than a 50% chance that they will overrule her however, they may send it back for some clarification and suggest the imposition of limitations.

I am no expert in the way of law, so I should probably keep my nose out of these conversations. The Norris-LaGuardia Act will prohibit the owners from being able to exert their will in this situation, that is to say, of delaying the inevitable, correct? Is this the case as opposed to actually helping the owners? This is where we need a lawyer who is a member of this board to explain of this, as I don't really trust NFL.com and NFL Network to provide fair and balanced coverage any more than I trust Fox to deliver the news that is anything other than right wing in scope or MSNBC as liberal in depiction. What comes across the NFL media waves is ultimately filtered from the top down in my estimation.

It's as much Newspeak in the classic Orwellian verses as I've seen.

Originally Posted by Dagan81

we need a lawyer who is a member of this board

We had one, but he got banned a couple times and hasn't come back.

Originally Posted by Butka

Mikey?

Someone PLEASE tell me about Mikey. I keep hearing about him as a Denver Broncos fan, but I want to hear more about him.