Today,
Donald Fehr issued a memo to the players after meeting with the NHL.
He starts the memo as follows:
The
NHLPA’s Negotiating Committee today provided the NHL Owners with a
comprehensive 6 page proposal on the key issues (see below). As you will read
in the proposal, the players have made substantial moves in order to address
all of the owners’ concerns, end the owners’ lockout and get the game back on
the ice. Our proposal works off the league’s proposed language/structures and
moves off our position that there be a guaranteed players’ share. These are
major moves in the owners’ direction. Regarding player contractual issues, we
have also addressed the owners concerns regarding back-diving contacts and NHL
contacts being “buried” in the minors.
Fehr continues by indicating that there is now an "undisputed gap" between the sides when it comes to revenue:
Now that
we have made this proposal, there is no longer any doubt as to how far apart
the parties are in dollars. As you will
recall, we had previously said we thought the gap was less than $200M, while
the owners had said that the gap was much larger and close to $1B. Under our proposal, it is now undisputed that
the gap is only $182 M over 5 years. Now
it is up to the owners to finally make a move towards the players.
At the
same time, we have protected player rights by refusing to accept their proposals
restricting free agency and salary arbitration.
Fehr
continues by outlining the key points in the NHLPA's proposal:
Here are a
few significant details from our proposal:
Players’
Share: A major move in the owners’ direction by removing guarantees or fixed
targets for Players’ share.
Honouring
Players’ Contracts/Transition payments: Players’ Share will equal 50 percent of
HRR plus fixed payments in the first four years to partially honour player
contracts and ease the transition to 50/50:
2012-13 -
$182M
2013-14 -
$128M
2014-15 -
$72M
2015-16 -
$11M
Total $393M
*The
owners had previously proposed $211M
Long-term
back-diving contracts – Cap benefit recapture rule so clubs no longer benefit
from front-loading contracts (move in the owners’ direction)
Contracts
in the minors – Clubs take a cap hit on contracts in the minors over $1M (move
in the owners’ direction)
Four
Recall Rule – Unlimited recalls after regular season (move in the owners’
direction)
Salary
Arbitration – Elimination of walk-away from arbitrator’s decision, but clubs
can still “walk-away” by not qualifying a player
...We will provide a further update following this meeting.
Here's the actual proposal:
NHLPA Proposal -- 21 November 2012
Here's the actual proposal:
This proposal addresses significant open issues concerning
revenue sharing, player contracting, the players’ share, and certain other open
areas, as reflected below. This proposal
does not address other items upon which we have agreed or are pending, such as
health and safety, hockey issues, the “jock tax”, and international.
1) Revenue
Sharing
• Pool of
$200 Million at $3.303 B of HRR. Varies
year to year with HRR.
• Contributions
to be raised per NHL formula. No
discretion to increase individual team contributions beyond what formula
provides
• Existing
level of distributions to be protected for 2 years. If additional funds needed, raised pro-rata
from all teams
• Revenue
Sharing Oversight Committee (RSOC) has discretion to adjust amounts for Phase
One distributions by up to +/- 15% per team, provided that all such adjustments
are considered and decided upon at one time
o RSOC by
unanimous vote may move beyond +/- 15% limitation towards but not exceeding the
straight pool value for regular season HRR.
(Must therefore compute straight pool every year.)
• Industry
Growth Fund to be managed by the RSOC.
o IGF will
have callable dollars of up to $20M in first year, $40M in second year, and
$60M in each subsequent year of the agreement.
o Need to
establish criteria for which teams may apply for IGF funding and/or will submit
plans.
o IGF
funding is available to any team by unanimous consent of RSOC
o IGF
funding also available for industry-wide programs or projects
• RSOC has
seven (7) members selected by the parties in their sole discretion, as follows
o Four
employer representatives, at least one of which must by an owner
o Three (3)
player representatives, at least one of which must be a player
o Parties
may name up to 2 Alternate RSOC representatives who will serve in the event of
absence of a member
o Need to
spell out in drafting the process of the RSOC, and limited arbitral review of
decisions
2) Defined
Benefit Pension Plan
• The
parties will establish a defined benefit pension plan under US law per the
NHLPA proposal.
3)
Discipline
• For
on-ice discipline, there will be an appeal to a neutral arbitrator or to a
panel of three arbitrators (one appointed by each side and one neutral). The standard of review will be whether the
League’s finding of a violation of the League Playing Rules was supported by
substantial evidence, and, if so, whether the penalty imposed was within the
League’s reasonable discretion and consistent with past practice
• For
off-ice discipline, there will be an appeal to the impartial arbitrator. The issue will be whether the discipline was
for just cause.
4) Player
Contracting and System Issues
• NHLPA
liability for escrow is eliminated from the side letter.
• NHLPA
may set a higher percentage for escrow in a given year than the formula would
provide. The NHL may also set a higher
percentage than the formula would provide in the last year of the agreement,
provided that any number so set is not unreasonable.
• The
Playoff Pool is increased per the NHLPA proposal
• Liquidated
damages provisions in SPCs are prohibited.
This applies only to new contracts, i.e., contracts entered into after a
new CBA is in effect.
• Prompt
mutual disclosure of European loan agreements, ATOs and PTOs.
• NHLPA
proposal on no trade / no move clauses
• NHL
proposal to prevent a team playing with less than the minimum of 18/2 is
accepted provided limitation is the NHL minimum + $100,000; counts against the
share but not the cap.
• Waivers
o Re-entry
waivers are eliminated
o Waivers
will be required to loan a player who is on emergency recall if that player has
played 10 games
o NHLPA
proposal on 13.23 waivers
• Four
Recall Rule
o After the
conclusion of the Regular Season, a Club
may exercise an unlimited number of additional Regular Recalls provided that it
may have no more than three (3) Players on its Active Roster who were recalled
by way of Regular Recall after the Trade Deadline
• Minimum
salary continues to increase on the same schedule as previous CBA, $25,000
every second year
• Goepfert
Rule as proposed by NHLPA
• Performance
bonus cushion in each year of the agreement
• The
Lower limit must be satisfied without consideration of performance bonuses.
• Players
and cash/cap trading. A team may have an
unlimited number of Retained Salary Transactions up to 15% of the Upper Limit
in any League year
• The
amount in excess of $1M paid to a player while in the minor leagues or in
Europe on an NHL contract counts against the cap (none counts against the
share). This applies only to new
contracts, i.e., contracts entered into after a new CBA is in effect.
• NHLPA
cap benefit recapture proposal.
o Applies
only to new contracts, i.e., contracts entered into after a new CBA is in
effect.
o Applies
to contracts of 9 years or longer
o 35 year
old rule changed to provide that the cap charge taken will be as per cap benefit recapture
• Salary
Arbitration
o Walk away
eliminated
• Second
buyout period will continue in its current form except that
o A Club
may not buy out a player who was not on its Reserve List as of the most recent
Trade Deadline
o A Club
may not buy out a player who has a cap hit of less than $3 M
• Critical
dates calendar
o Sec.
12.3(a) election moved per NHLPA proposal
o Free
agency interview period per NHLPA proposal
• Salary
Cap and Payroll Range
o Growth
Factor, Performance Bonus Cushion, Long-Term, injury continue except for any
changes already agreed to or contained in this proposal
o +8M/-8M
payroll range becomes +/- 20% of midpoint beginning in 2013/14
o The Upper
Limit may not fall below 67.25 M in any year of the agreement. This is half way between the 11/12 Upper
Limit (64.3 M) and the 12/13 UL (70.2 M).
5) Players’
Share
• Our
players’ share proposal is identical to yours in all material respects except
for the amount of the transition payments added to the 50% share. There are no guarantees or fixed targets,
other than a requirement that, beginning with the second year of the Agreement,
players’ share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the
prior season. This proposal allows us to
determine players’ share regardless of the effects of the lockout and its
aftermath.
• Player
share will equal 50% of HRR, plus these fixed dollar payments attributable to
the first four years of the agreement:
• 2012/13 $ 182 M
• 2013/14 $ 128 M
• 2014/15 $
72 M
• 2015/16 $
11 M
• Payment
of these amounts may be deferred for one year (specific payment date to be agreed
upon), with the deferral accumulating interest rate equal to the sum of the
prime interest rate in effect at The J.P. Morgan Chase Bank on the next June
15, plus 1%. Payment of these fixed
dollar amounts is guaranteed by the League.
• In years
two through five of this Agreement, the players’ share in dollars may not be
less than it was in the previous year.
• Attached
are charts which show this proposal against your last in the format you
provided after our last proposal.
6) Term of
CBA
• The term
of the CBA will be for 5 years/seasons, and will end on September 15, 2017.
7)
Transition Rules to be negotiated
• May
cover, among other things, compliance buyouts, pro-ration of status/service and
statistical criteria/thresholds based on the length of the season, movement of
deadlines, and any other relevant matters.
1 comment:
So the players want the cap ceiling to *GO UP* in the first year? And so much for no guaranteed targets -- they very much want a guarantee that after the first year their share will not go down. And while teams are penalized for mistakes, so any future "Redden" still counts against the cap, that money does not count toward the players' share. Huh? It's money paid by an owner, to a player, but it doesn't count for the players' share?
Post a Comment