Nothing has been finalized and economic issues between both sides remainGETTY IMAGES
The NHL "shared draft schedules with the NHLPA on Thursday, including 52-game and 56-game season outlines," according to Seravalli & LeBrun of TSN.ca. The schedules were "all based on a Jan. 1 start date, but the two sides have discussed pushing that date back until later in the month." A Jan. 15 start "is specifically being discussed and both sides would prefer the 56-game plan with the Stanley Cup awarded in early July, but nothing has been finalized and economic issues between both sides remain" (TSN.ca, 12/4). In Toronto, McGran & Zwolinski report talks between NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman and NHLPA Exec Dir Don Fehr resumed this week after 10 idle days, although players are "now focusing on Jan. 15 or Feb. 1 in return-to-play talks amongst themselves" (TORONTO STAR, 12/4). Sportsnet's Elliotte Friedman confirmed that the NHL and union "engaged in recent days about a Jan 15 start, with training camps opening approximately two weeks earlier" (TWITTER.com, 12/4).
COURT FIGHT POSSIBLE: TSN.ca's Rick Westhead cited sources as saying that the NHLPA's lawyers are "investigating whether to file an unfair labour practice complaint with the U.S. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) or pursue a grievance with an arbitrator if the NHL decides to cancel the upcoming season." If the league decides against playing the '20-21 season, a complaint to either the NLRB or an arbitrator "would be the process the NHLPA would follow to try to get players paid." Several labor lawyers said that the NHLPA "could either file a complaint with the U.S. NLRB (players on Canadian franchises would be included in such a filing) or file a grievance with an arbitrator." They said that "both moves have their advantages." In a case, both the NHL and NHLPA "could argue that the language in the CBA favours its side" (TSN.ca, 12/2).
IN THE DARK: In St. Louis, Jim Thomas writes there was a time when Dec. 1 was "regarded as a possible start date for the new season." Then it "became Jan. 1, which is looking like a near-impossibility as each day comes and goes." Blues GM Doug Armstrong said of his involvement in negotiations, "I don’t get too wrapped up in the day-to-day stuff. It’s done at such a high level, there’s not much information given down to really (anyone) outside of Gary Bettman’s inner-circle and Don Fehr’s inner-circle that I’m aware of.” He added, “So I just sort of deal with the information that I read on the Internet. Everyone’s shooting for Jan. 1, so Jan. 1 it is" (ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 12/4). Flyers LW James van Riemsdyk, the team's NHLPA player rep, said, "It’s not like we did this agreement in January and then the pandemic hit and it’s a different world we’re living in. This agreement was negotiated with all this in mind and trying to map out the next few years.” He added, “As players, we’re ready to roll and ready to play and uphold the agreement. We’re just waiting to hear from the owners, but we’re ready to get started" (PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER, 12/4).
STRATEGIC BLUNDER? THE HOCKEY NEWS' Ken Campbell wrote seeking financial modifications is a "really bad look for a league that is looking to change the terms of a collective bargaining agreement it reached just five months ago." Despite the NHL's denials, it is a "renegotiation," because "trying to change the terms from 20 percent escrow and 10 percent salary deferral to 25 percent escrow and 26 percent salary deferral cannot be seen in any other light." Campbell: "So instead of denying that’s what the league is doing, Bettman could have basically said something like, 'we have the right to renegotiate,' because that is exactly what the league believes it has. And like any showdown between management and labor, it’s going to come down to the two Big L’s -- leverage and language." In terms of leverage, it is "no contest." The owners have "almost all of it and the players have very little." As far as language, "both sides believe they have a case" (SI.com, 12/3).
