The proposal the Players Association offered the NHL was progressive, inventive, far-reaching, owner-friendly, sport-growing and didn’t have a prayer. Oscar Wilde would call it The Unimportance of Being Earnest.
Hockey’s collective bargaining agreement negotiations have deteriorated into a fight over whose proposal becomes the vehicle of an agreement. While negotiations will continue with staff, commissioner Gary Bettman and union head Donald Fehr won’t meet at the table until Wednesday, a massive loss of dwindling time before owners lock out the players Sept. 15.
Bettman Wednesday sniffed that the union’s proposal offered Tuesday “wasn’t particularly responsive to our proposal [of July 13].” He said ownership values the union’s proposal differently than do the authors.
“We’re looking at the world differently,” he said. “There’s still a wide gap between us and not much time. We’re not on the same page.”
Fehr, meanwhile, suggested the owners’ position looks scripted.
“The players understand what the realities are. How could they not, given what happened in this sport the last time [2004-05], in basketball and football. It looks like a playbook. We hope that’s not the case. But so far, there aren’t many differences,” Fehr said.
Bettman referred to the NFL and NBA situations, claiming the players have not grasped the lessons of those leagues. Fehr responded by pointing out that baseball —whose union he headed — has no salary cap, shares revenue and currently enjoys labor peace.
The players’ proposal would:
l Trim the rise in players salaries from current base to 2, 4 and 6 percent of increased revenue over the next three respective years, with a union option to revert to the straight, current 57 percent of the pot in a fourth season.
lAbility of teams to trade for right to exceed cap or go under the lower limit.
l Increase international play, with proceeds to fund a target of $100 million of revenue-sharing for troubled teams.
l Teams with more than $10 million in profits would pay 10 percent to revenue sharing.
l Give troubled teams extra draft picks to use, sell or trade.
lLimit teams’ non-player spending.
Fehr said that his side’s concession on salary increases would cost the players $465 million over three years, if growth continues as it has under the current CBA.
The owners asked for takebacks which would cut the players’ share of hockey-related revenue from the current 57 percent to 46 percent, redefining HRR to be 43 percent by current standards, the union says. The owners are seeking some $450 million a year in salary cuts.
The owners also wanted to virtually abolish salary arbitration, limit contracts to five years and extend entry system deals from three to five years. Unrestricted free agency would require 10 years of service.
The last time, it was the league that was hyping its salary cap as the cornerstone of a “partnership” with the players. This time, the players’ union asked for partnership in Tuesday’s proposal delivery.