Russell Okung files complaint against NFLPA with National Labor Relations Board

[RuskieTitan]

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28872617/russell-okung-files-complaint-nflpa-nlrb

Quote

Soon-to-be Carolina Panthers offensive tackle Russell Okung has accused the National Football League Players Association of negotiating the proposed CBA in bad faith, taking the step of filing an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board Monday.

In the filing, Okung is accusing NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith of pushing the new CBA to a vote through to the entire group of players despite the objections and vote of the NFLPA executive committee.

---

During a February vote, the executive committee voted 6-5 not to recommend the proposed CBA to players. After a meeting with owners during the NFL combine, the executive committee again remained in majority on its desire not to recommend the proposed deal.

---

The NFLPA then took a vote of all 32 team player reps in Indianapolis, with the vote being 17-14 to approve the deal, with one player abstaining. The NFLPA needs a two-thirds vote to pass the deal along to the full player group with recommendation, but short of that number they decided to still move the vote to the full player group without recommendation because they received a simple majority vote to approve.

The vote on the new CBA was sent to players last Thursday, and it will be open for voting via DocuSign until Saturday at 11:59 p.m. ET after a two-day extension was announced Monday. There needs to be just a simple majority (50% plus one vote) to pass the new proposed CBA.

Unbelievable. The NFLPA has got to be the worst players union in all of professional sports. They let the owners walk over them with demands; they disregarded the executive committee's recommendation not once, but TWICE; and then they shove the vote out to all the players DESPITE NOT MEETING THE REQUIRED TWO-THIRDS VOTE!

For the record, 17 votes in favor is just 53.125% of the vote; they would need 22 out of 32 to reach the two-thirds threshold.

I can totally understand why some players have been outraged recently, and frankly, even if the deal does get somehow 'passed' with a majority, it wouldn't surprise me if some of the player base revolted / went on strike. It's clear that some folks in the NFLPA are using this as an opportunity to further their own agenda, at the expense of all the players.

 

Hopefully the media reports on this issue fairly, given how neglectful some of the leadership of the NFLPA has been in following their own established guidelines, and doesn't just bend to the will of the NFL (i.e. Owners).

[RuskieTitan]

Yes, there is a difference between passing the vote with a recommendation and passing it without a recommendation... but if your leadership (executive committee) refused to recommend it twice, AND you didn't meet the threshold for a full recommendation by the player reps... is that really a deal you should be signing?

I could see the vote passing by the slimmest of margins, largely due to how many fringe players there are out there that would stand to gain just a bit from this CBA, even if the overall deal isn't favorable for the starters on rosters.

[jrry32]

7 minutes ago, RuskieTitan said:

Yes, there is a difference between passing the vote with a recommendation and passing it without a recommendation... but if your leadership (executive committee) refused to recommend it twice, AND you didn't meet the threshold for a full recommendation by the player reps... is that really a deal you should be signing?

I could see the vote passing by the slimmest of margins, largely due to how many fringe players there are out there that would stand to gain just a bit from this CBA, even if the overall deal isn't favorable for the starters on rosters.

If the vote passes because the deal benefits the majority of the players, the stars can suck it up. They're already much richer than the other guys.

[ninjapirate]

MLBPA is actually worse. 

[RuskieTitan]

Just now, jrry32 said:

If the vote passes because the deal benefits the majority of the players, the stars can suck it up. They're already much richer than the other guys.

I'm not talking about stars. 53 guys on a roster, you've got 22 starters between offense and defense - we can round up to 30 between the nickel/dime guys, slot guys, and K/P for 'starters'. The rest are depth, special teams, and situational players at best. If PS and guys who are fringe roster types get any sort of benefit, it's a no-brainer for them to vote yes, no matter what happens for the rest. Starter quality players have more of a decision which way to go.

[whodatworm23]

Very interesting 

[jrry32]

17 minutes ago, RuskieTitan said:

I'm not talking about stars. 53 guys on a roster, you've got 22 starters between offense and defense - we can round up to 30 between the nickel/dime guys, slot guys, and K/P for 'starters'. The rest are depth, special teams, and situational players at best. If PS and guys who are fringe roster types get any sort of benefit, it's a no-brainer for them to vote yes, no matter what happens for the rest. Starter quality players have more of a decision which way to go.

The starters are typically getting paid more. If the deal benefits the majority of the league who just happened to be getting paid less and having shorter careers, oh well. They chose a system where majority rules.

[Danger]

This deal is great for the lower end players, but everybody looks out for them and theirs.

[RaidersAreOne]

Off to a great start with his new team.

[Leoric]

7 minutes ago, RaidersAreOne said:

Off to a great start with his new team.

You can say the dude can’t stay healthy, but you can’t say he isn’t a good teammate. This is maneuvering on his part. He’s trying to differentiate himself as a candidate to head the union and the best way to do that is to file a suit against the union in a close vote where objectively they didn’t follow by laws. 
 

This really has zero to do with the NFL or the Panthers and lore to do with the ineptness that’s is the NFL players union. 

[sp6488]

13 minutes ago, Boltstrikes said:

You can say the dude can’t stay healthy, but you can’t say he isn’t a good teammate. This is maneuvering on his part. He’s trying to differentiate himself as a candidate to head the union and the best way to do that is to file a suit against the union in a close vote where objectively they didn’t follow by laws. 
 

This really has zero to do with the NFL or the Panthers and lore to do with the ineptness that’s is the NFL players union. 

Need some more clarification on that. Quote provided suggests that supermajority is required to pass along "with recommendation," but neglects to mention if a majority is acceptable to pass along without said recommendation. The way it's written would suggest that this was an acceptable route per the bylaws.

Further, it's notable (to your claim) that he's making the accusation of "negotiating in bad faith," rather than that they didn't follow bylaws.

Edited March 10, 2020 by sp6488

[GSUeagles14]

the more i think about it, the more it becomes clear that this is a scummy move by okung. Hes almost conceeding that it benefits the majority of the players so it will pass but they shouldnt even have a chance to vote cause it doesnt benefit the guys who have already been paid. 

[Xenos]

22 minutes ago, GSUeagles14 said:

the more i think about it, the more it becomes clear that this is a scummy move by okung. Hes almost conceeding that it benefits the majority of the players so it will pass but they shouldnt even have a chance to vote cause it doesnt benefit the guys who have already been paid. 

Based on what Andrew Brandt wrote, it actually seems like a bad deal for all the players overall and not just the stars.

[Acgott]

1 hour ago, Xenos said:

Based on what Andrew Brandt wrote, it actually seems like a bad deal for all the players overall and not just the stars.

There’s a lovely conspiracy theory between Brandt, Dan Graziano, and Mike Florio. Graziano and Florio seem to think Brandt is angling himself for head of the NFLPA

[GSUeagles14]

2 hours ago, Xenos said:

Based on what Andrew Brandt wrote, it actually seems like a bad deal for all the players overall and not just the stars.

well thats one person opinion, , it had some obvious flats and at least to me he was biased towards the players. Theres plenty of good things in that deal, its why rodgers  and now okung  are nervous. The deal doesnt really benefit stars, but it helps out the majority of the roster, its unfortunate that the guys it helps the most dont have a voice that too many people want to listen to so we're stuck with superstars saying its a bad deal when in reality its only really bad for a small minority. I mean, the NFLPA said they wanted a deal to help the core, that what they got and you have guys like Nate Solder who has been PAID like Sherma, Pouncey and ROdgers saying it is a good deal for those  core guys and thats why he'll vote to pass it.