Breaking news: Hunter says there will be disclaimer of interest

[Chris]

Well... I'll be the stupid kid in the class room who holds up his hand and asks very late and dumb question... there's got to be like 3 or 4 other kids who are thinking to themselves "thank god he asked the question... I felt like an idiot asking it"...

What exactly does decertification mean?  I don't get it.  I need an idiots guide to decertification... what the players hope to achieve by doing it and how it is beneficial... and what the fallout will be.  I haven't found any articles that break it down.  If there is no "union", who do the owners present their proposal to?... Does every active NBA player just vote?  And how is that really any different? 

Thanks in advance.

Well, first, it's a disclaimer of interest, not decertification (I will edit title of thread shortly). 

And, from what I can gather, this just means that the union is no longer a union, but a trade association.  That means that they can legally sue the league in an anti-trust suit (which a union is not allowed to do). 

Beyond that, I will leave it to the lawyers to explain, but I think that is the most important part.

[indeedproceed]

Well... I'll be the stupid kid in the class room who holds up his hand and asks very late and dumb question... there's got to be like 3 or 4 other kids who are thinking to themselves "thank god he asked the question... I felt like an idiot asking it"...

What exactly does decertification mean?  I don't get it.  I need an idiots guide to decertification... what the players hope to achieve by doing it and how it is beneficial... and what the fallout will be.  I haven't found any articles that break it down.  If there is no "union", who do the owners present their proposal to?... Does every active NBA player just vote?  And how is that really any different?  

Thanks in advance.

I'm not sure of the particulars, but a union cannot file a class action anti-trust lawsuit. Players, as long as there is a union then, cannot pursue antitrust cases against the NBA. The union de-certified to make room for the lawsuit.

That's my very base understanding of it. Someone else can tell me I'm wrong now.

[fairweatherfan]

NBA is saying at this point they aren't going back to the "reset" offer they kept threatening to apply. 

Too soon to say but in that regard at least the players may have called their bluff.

[slamtheking]

So what happens with the contracts now?  I know that under decertification the contracts from the last CBA could have been nullified because the contracts were only considered valid with union representation.

Is it possible we'd be looking at an NBA, when all of this is finally worked out, without any clear existing contracts?

I doubt it.  once the smoke clears I have have every expectation that the owners will make current contracts valid in the next CBA (with the possible exception of players cut lose for amnesty).

since this is the nuclear option and most likely the death of this year's season, I hope what comes out of this is an agreement that plays to the C's favor.  The team will have only a few players on the books and hopefully plenty of available cash for picking up the FA's from this year and next.   

I think you're right, but it will be interesting to follow the legal argument over whether these contracts are valid after the union which negotiated the CBA under which the contracts are structured is no longer representing the players.

I have no doubt the union will be back to representing the players before another game is played.  they may wait until after the next CBA is in place but they'll be back to representing the players. 
Assuming this season is gone, the contracts on the books for 2012-2013 will be in effect and everyone who's contract expires before then will become FA's.  I would not be surprised though that should the full season be lost that the owner's structure the next agreement to give them the advantage over young players where they will try to keep that year of team control that they've lost. 

[fairweatherfan]

On the plus side, this means Toine will get to fulfill his dream of being one of the highest-paid ballers in America again.





I'M BACK ON TOP, Y'ALL!!

[barefacedmonk]

Here is the legal explaination if anybody is interested.

[The Walker Wiggle]

What exactly does decertification mean?  I don't get it.  I need an idiots guide to decertification... what the players hope to achieve by doing it and how it is beneficial... and what the fallout will be.  I haven't found any articles that break it down.  If there is no "union", who do the owners present their proposal to?... Does every active NBA player just vote?  And how is that really any different?

Here's a link to one sports law professor's take, actually published last week, and some relevant excerpts.

What is decertification? Disclaimer of interest?
Decertification occurs when employees formally revoke the authority of their union to engage in collective bargaining on their behalf. Disclaimer of interest occurs when the union formally terminates its right to represent the players. Both procedures effectively dissolve the union and permit the employees to negotiate as individuals.

What's the remedy? What can the players gain by bringing an antitrust suit?
The players would ask for two things in any antitrust suit against the NBA owners. First, they would seek an injunction from a court that would block the lockout and force the owners to re-open the league. Second, if they were unable to get an injunction, the players would seek money damages to compensate them for lost salaries and other financial injuries caused by the lockout. Antitrust law is a particularly powerful weapon because it gives private plaintiffs treble damages -i.e., three-times actual damages - for successful claims.

Of course, the threat of the injunction and the treble-damages may also give the players a more immediate benefit that does not require a court ruling - the risk of the antitrust litigation may give them leverage at the bargaining table and push the owners to make a deal.

If the NFL Players "lost" their case in Brady v. NFL, why do the NBA players think they'll do any better?
The ruling in Brady obviously favors the NBA owners, but the NBA players may still have success in court for at least a few reasons. First, only courts within the Eighth Circuit are bound by Brady, and it is a virtual certainty that any antitrust suit brought by the NBA players would not be filed in a court within the Eighth Circuit (the NBA filed its preemptory legal action in NY, and the players would likely file their suit in an employee-friendly jurisdiction like California).

Second, let's be clear as to what the Eight Circuit decided in the Brady case. The NFL players argued that the NFL lockout was illegal and asked for 2 things--an injunction and damages. The district court preliminarily concluded that the lockout was illegal and granted the injunction. The Eighth Circuit reversed, narrowly holding that the Norris-LaGuardia Act prevents federal courts from enjoining lockouts. The court did not conclude that the lockout was illegal and did not conclude that the players were not entitled to bring their antitrust claim. So, even if a court was bound by Brady, it could still determine that the players are able to bring a post-dissolution antitrust suit challenging the lockout, and that the lockout was illegal. In other words, Brady does not prevent the NBA players from dissolving their union and bringing a successful antitrust suit for three-times damages.

[jaybahs]

I love how professional these NBA players are ... You've got Billy Hunter and Derek Fisher dressed to the dime trying to derive an explanation as to why the players won't accept the deal being offered ... and Chauncy Billups and Russell Westbrook are both in hoodies ... Keep it classy NBA ... (puke)

[DKClassic]

somebody hold me and tell me it's going to be ok

[SHAQATTACK]

Don't care about this season...I expected the worse anyway.. in the end I hope the C's have bucket loads of money  or cap room, dump all the dead weight players ,  C;s need to start over with a few decent players "READ YOUNG PLAYERS"  like  D Howard to help with the center position. Rebuild .

[dmny5000]

Don't care about this season...I expected the worse anyway.. in the end I hope the C's have bucket loads of money  or cap room, dump all the dead weight players ,  C;s need to start over with a few decent players "READ YOUNG PLAYERS"  like  D Howard to help with the center position. Rebuild .

Bold prediction: Dwight Howard will never be a Boston Celtic. Yes that was sarcasm.

I care about this season, if it doesn't happen it's the end of the greatest Celtics team I've been alive to watch.

Not to mention possibly the end of KG's career. How awful would it be for this team to go out like that?

I love basketball so I care if there's a season. At this point I just want either side to give in, I cant take it anymore.

[tyrone biggums]

This is horrible, the only winner here is Jeffrey Kessler. He finally will get his big pay day that he should have gotten from that lousy NFL player union...

[Roy H.]

This is horrible, the only winner here is Jeffrey Kessler. He finally will get his big pay day that he should have gotten from that lousy NFL player union...

Yeah, in litigation, the lawyers always win.

[tyrone biggums]

This is horrible, the only winner here is Jeffrey Kessler. He finally will get his big pay day that he should have gotten from that lousy NFL player union...

Yeah, in litigation, the lawyers always win.

As dumb as it sounds it seems like if the NFL didn't play this year, the lawyers and agents wouldn't have been as hellbent in lawsuits and decertification. I guess in the end they always get their money, eventually. There has been many reports that mentioned that the NFLPA* had to kick Kessler out of the meetings in order to get a deal done because he was so hardline on litigation.

[Roy H.]

Here's what I don't understand about the players' legal strategy:

They're not pursuing an injunction like the NFL players did.  I had assumed that they would at least attempt to convince a more favorable Circuit Court (perhaps the Ninth) that the Eighth Circuit had got it wrong with the NFL players.  If successful, they could have lifted the lockout in its entirety.  Hearings on injunctions are always expedited

The players aren't going that route.  Instead, they're putting their eggs in the basket of "summary judgment", which they hope to get to within 60 days.

Do any of the lawyers in here think that's a winning strategy?  How often is summary judgment granted?  In 1 in 100 cases, tops?  For the non-lawyers, a summary judgment is basically a motion to ask the court to declare that one side has won the case.  To grant summary judgment, the court needs to find that even if you accept all of the NBA's factual arguments as true, there is still no way they could prevail.  The players need to show that there's no "genuine issue of material fact" that, if decided in the NBA's favor, could lead them to prevail.

Does *anybody* think there aren't legitimate factual issues here?  Summary judgment here is the equivalent of a 90 foot buzzer-beating 4-point play.  In other words, it's just not going to happen.

So, why waste time, other than that Jeffrey Kessler wants to bring money into his law firm?  What's the end game?  By not going the injunction route, and instead arguing for SJ -- a very, very difficult legal standard -- the players have essentially given themselves no chance.

Now, who knows, maybe there's something particular to anti-trust law that makes it unique, and perhaps summary judgment is granted all the time.  However, that certainly isn't my understanding, and I can tell you from other civil contexts that banking on summary judgment -- especially on a 60 day deadline -- is absolutely fool-hardy. 

The popular argument is that this suit is for leverage purposes, but what leverage is gained when the NBA has very intelligent lawyers on its side telling them that summary judgment is a joke?

I feel like this strategy is almost rail-roading us towards a cancelled season.  In two months, the owners will have just been awarded a small victory in court, with the court telling the parties that the case isn't ripe for SJ.  The parties will be directed to begin discovery.  The owners won't have budged, and perhaps will have worsened their offer.  What then?  Whatever it is, it won't be good for the players or the fans.