Dough Boy;3876417 said:
Clearly I would agree with your scenario. I'm not going to argue just to argue. But tell me how that correlates to the NFL. The NFL is not set up like an LLC. Its clear the owners pay the employees and that the players pay are not tied to business performance. You will have to bridge that gap for me.
Unless I'm not following the NFL correctly, the players are 'guaranteed' a certain pay and promised a sum certain dollar amount, in the form of a contract that stipulates the time and amount of money they are to be paid if their services are used by said team. What am I missing? In no way can a players pay be tied to revenue. I know about the salary cap, but again, that’s a hard number. If all 32 teams loss money, the salary cap is not redacted. It remains a firm number.
Now owners on the other hand, they can make more or less depending on the total revenue of the team. In your scenario one, I would agree that you are entitled to see the financial statements as you are due to receive 40% of the upside. Again, if we make zero, then you get nothing. Give me a scenario where an NFL player has the potential to play 16 games and make zero dollars?
I see this as the cruxt of all considerations...
At the player's lifestyle, and fully supported in professional considerations in comparison to almost all other trades/skills, they are not being deprived of base level considerations on any non-negotiable element.
That the business of the NFL, fully develops both talent and market value for those same employees...only serves to actually support a somewhat traditional and transcendent umbrella given to sports to begin with. There is also a concept at law, in resonable returns for a product.
No where, have I seen Law or even Common Law where the greed of an employee supercedes that base level of productivity in the hiring and ownership group. That element alone, forces the identification of blatant injustice as well as unreasonableness.
This all boils down, in real function, to applicability and function of a contract. Heck yea, the Union is trying to eleminate that direct foundation in law. They are trying to goad both the owners, and the courts to rule against common sense involved in the protection and foundation of free trade itself. The sacredness of the Contract in the foundation of trade and product.
The owners have stayed within the foundations provided by the UCC, (Uniform Commercial Code) in all of it's endeavors...and as such, are protected by the very essence of law. Simply, uniformity of fairness...JUSTICE!
Where public opinion may sway as to an eye appeal projection of fairness, and extend the 'supposed right' to know all that is involved in the financial affairs of one's employer...that is just NOT the case at law. There is a degree of reasonableness that should apply with such an eye appeal solution. The traditions of common law and even court history has evolved around those protections that secure a business from most hostile and heated environmental aspects. Anonymity is guaranteed to certain degree, as is self determination at an ownership level as well. That is akin to dignity and integrity being exhibited, instead of ajudicated.
What is a frivolous law suite? Well, grossly, the players could even be seen as heading that direction...but I won't include the punitive elements in consideration in this resolution. Using reasonableness as a functional scale, that could be seen as over-kill and not handling the problem at the lowest and simplest level.
Until such time as the Owners do depart from the contractual considerations, the Union should consider some possible fall out in measurement of their own applied motives at court now.
If I were the Court, even with a basis for the requirement in a ruling, I would sting the Union for jumping the events necessitating the request for ruling, and forcing a legal issue to be adjudged before the substantive elements have even actualized in time. That fabricates parts of elements in proof and is contrary to soundness for accredable ajudication to begin with.
But courts are a human element, and we all shall have to await a sequence of cause and effect...and if the lower level is not careful, this will again go to the Supreme Court who established the umbrells for sport to begin with.
