IBJNews

AFL-CIO takes stand against NFL owners

Associated Press
September 13, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

NFL players have a new teammate in their labor fight—the AFL-CIO.

One of the nation's largest unions said Monday it had sent all of the league's owners a letter warning that a lockout in one of America's "few thriving" industries could cost thousands of Americans their jobs and cities more than $140 million in revenue.

It also urged owners to release financial statements, something NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith has sought for more than a year. The AFL-CIO called the owners' refusal to provide financial documents "troubling."

"While we are happy to hear that negotiations with the union are continuing, we are disappointed that in the face of your threatened lockout, financial demands and proposed increase in regular season games you have refused to provide any information about your team's profit (or loss) as justification for your requests from NFLPA members," said the letter, dated last Friday.

The AFL-CIO urged owners to consider the potential ramifications a lockout would have on non-football employees such as stadium workers and hotel and restaurant employees, and offered to assist NFLPA leaders by reaching out to elected officials in NFL cities and Congress to seek public hearings on the league's labor issues. The letter was signed by AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka and executive vice president Arlene Holt Baker.

In reply, the NFL asked the AFL-CIO to ensure that the union commits to serious negotiation.

"We share the interest of the AFL-CIO in achieving a negotiated settlement that is fair to fans, clubs, and players, who have received more than $20 billion in salaries and benefits under the current CBA, and who have experienced steady growth in compensation despite the worst economic downturn in our lifetimes," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said.

"We pledge to the AFL-CIO the firm commitment of the NFL clubs to reach a fair settlement that is good for everyone, especially fans. Nobody knows better than the AFL-CIO that it takes two parties to reach a labor agreement, and we call on the AFL-CIO to encourage the NFLPA to make the same commitment to collective bargaining that NFL owners have made."

Players at the season-opening game Thursday night and six of Sunday's 12 afternoon games walked to the hash marks before their games and raised their index fingers as a sign of union solidarity. Afterward, some players cited the very language that appeared in the letter sent to the owners.

"It's a show of solidarity saying that, 'Hey, we're in it together with all the workers in the stadium, all the police officers that are working extra in here, all the firefighters, all the medical staff, all the businesses around the stadium,'" Houston offensive lineman Eric Winston said Sunday.

"That's what it's really all about. It's about the $140 million that every city loses if we don't have football next year."

The current collective bargaining agreement expires in March, and Smith has repeatedly said he believes owners are preparing for a lockout. He cites the television deals that will pay owners whether the games are played or not as evidence of the owners' intentions, and union reps also have advised players to save additional money.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell counters that the money must eventually be paid back if the games are not played, and that everyone wants to get a deal finished that assures long-term labor peace in America's most popular sport.

But the issues cited in the letter run deeper than what most consider the key issues to labor peace—salary caps and percentages of the owners' revenue.

Union leaders are also asking owners to provide more extensive long-term health benefits to ex-players, and contends some owners are attempting to change state laws to limit worker's compensation benefits.

"We know that our fellow union brothers face tremendous risks, extremely short careers and a high likelihood of post-career health concerns," the letter said. "Thus, we were surprised to learn that there is no guaranteed health-care for the injuries they suffer from professional football. We also have learned that they must play at least three years to secure only five years of post-career health care and that the NFL is currently challenging hundreds of worker's compensation cases."

The NFLPA also is considering another way to avoid a lockout—decertifying the union.

Should the union decertify, it could have the right to sue the league under antitrust laws if the players are locked out. It is sending out voting cards now because, logistically, getting enough signatures after the season would be difficult, if not impossible.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT