"Faced with the failure of their litigation
initiative," the NBPA withdrew its unfair labor practice
charge yesterday with the NLRB and "prepared to fight the
league's lockout on the arbitration front," according to
Murray Chass of the N.Y. TIMES. In filing its charge, the
union contended the lockout was illegal and that the sides
"had not bargained to impasse." Union lawyers say they
dropped their claim "because they were not going to get
action quickly enough," but Chass adds, "it was apparent"
that the NLRB's New York office "had concluded that there
was no merit, as least not now, in the union's charge."
Chass writes that by declaring a lockout, owners "are not
changing anything unilaterally" in player relations, but are
only "suspending the period in which free agents can be
signed." The NLRB "was not prepared to seek an injunction
or even issue a complaint against the league." Union
counsel Jeffrey Kessler: "The N.L.R.B. was always considered
a long shot, and we concluded it wasn't worth the effort or
our resources to pursue it." NBA Deputy Commissioner Russ
Granik: "I'm glad it's now confirmed that we have a
perfectly lawful lockout" (N.Y. TIMES, 8/14).
BIG WIN? In N.Y., Kevin Kernan writes the move "was a
clear victory for the owners." Kernan: "The players must
now recognize that the NBA lockout is completely lawful, and
the only way it will end is when the parties sit down and
ready a deal that is fair to both sides" (N.Y. POST, 8/14).
The AP's Chris Sheridan calls the withdrawal a "sudden and
surprising shift" by the NBPA, which will now focus on
arbitrator John Feerick's hearing on whether the league will
have to pay guaranteed contracts during the lockout (AP,
8/14). In Toronto, Bill Harris writes that if Feerick rules
for the union, "the owners will be pushed toward a
settlement." If he rules against the players, "the owners
may adopt a hard line and prepare to weather the longest
off-season in league history" (TORONTO STAR, 8/14).
GOOD MOVE BY UNION? In Philadelphia, John Smallwood
writes that yesterday's decision "must be viewed as a
positive sign." While it "only adds to the speculation"
that the players "might not have the financial grit to take
this fight to the limit," it was a "good" move because the
"two sides won't make progress until they return to the
bargaining table" (PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS, 8/14).
QUESTIONING EWING: ESPN MAGAZINE's Donnell Alexander
writes, "Now that NBA players and owners have perfected
their 'insulted' negotiating postures, they can begin
arguing over who's more at odds with Patrick Ewing's role in
WNBA broadcasts." Ewing provided color commentary during an
August 2 Liberty-Sting game on MSG Network. Alexander
writes that the NBPA President's "shilling for the NBA's
sister league is hardly an act of unity, especially after"
players were asked to boycott the World Championships. The
NBA "has no problem" with it. Granik: "To us, the WNBA is a
separate business. ... I think it's a little curious that
Patrick has no problem with this." Alexander adds that
Reggie Miller and Rick Mahorn also provide WNBA color
commentary for Lifetime and FSN (ESPN MAGAZINE, 8/24 issue).
In N.Y., Mark Kriegel also notes Ewing's actions in the wake
of the players' World Championship boycott, and writes that
it "says a little something about Ewing's much-alleged
ability as a leader" (N.Y. DAILY NEWS, 8/14).
