This is an analysis in relation to the article in the Los Angeles Times entitled "NBA players, owners ratify collective bargaining agreement" The concept of collective bargaining is looked at in totality. The nature of the collective bargaining, the underlying causes of the dispute, the hindrances to the bargaining and how it was finally resolved.
Collective Bargaining
In relation to the article in the Los Angeles Times entitled NBA players, owners ratify collective bargaining agreement, the collective bargaining dispute was as a result of the National Basket Association (NBA) players and owners failing to reach a consensus after the collective bargaining agreement that was ratified in 2005 had come to an end. The previous agreement was said to have flaws and needed some amendments since it made the team suffer great financial loses. This meant that the season 2011-12 was put in jeopardy leaving NBA with no option but to lock out its players.
Basically what caused the main division between the owners and the players who are represented by National Basketball Player Association was the differences in the labor laws in which there was a demand for an opt out after six years of a 10 years contract plan, revenue, salary cap structure and luxury tax. About $250 million was meant to be saved in one season.
Underlying causes of the dispute
Teams were not allowed to open their various training camps due to some divide decisions on how the Basketball Related Income was split in the previous labor contract. The owners felt that the 57% split that the players got was too much. Moreover, the issue about teams exceeding the salary cap having to be taxed the same as other teams arose. Ethical issues like players conducts on drug related issues and disciplinary measures from the owners also had to be addressed. The lock out made it possible for teams to be signed in or trade or even access the NBA premises; therefore, most of the players signed contracts in other countries like Europe to go and play there.
Overcoming the dispute
In order to triumph in the dispute, the players and owners agreed on a 50-50 split of basketball related income meaning that the players' salaries had to be cut by 12%. The players' contract was also reduced to 5 years after which teams that wanted to re-sign their own players are to give a maximum salary raise of 7.5% annually while those teams that preferred to sign other teams free agents were to make a 4.5% annual increase. Teams that exceeded the salary cap were also to pay higher luxury tax.
The teams also agreed upon a prolonged revenue- sharing arrangement. The labor bill had to include the drug program which also had to be changed so as to make a provision for testing even during off seasons; the blood was to be tested for human growth hormones and be confirmed by a panel of scientific experts who are neutral and those found be violating performance enhancing drugs were to be strictly penalized.
The fact that there was need for stiffened penalties shows how the players could have been using hard drugs or human growth hormones to enhance their performance. On the other hand, it seems like most of the players were being punished without substantial evidence which lay on the line their careers hence thought it best to include a neutral panel of experts to clarify matters.
Resolving the dispute
The dispute was however resolved and the players on their end agreed to ratify the deal by giving an 86 percentage vote out of the 200 players while the owners agreed on the ratification of the deal by a 25-5 vote. This meant that the teams were officially allowed to open their training camps and that the season for free agency that is the season 2011-12 had officially begun. This was conducted by electronic voting.
Importance of an arbiter
Commissioner David Stern among other union members seemed to have played the greatest role in the signing of this agreement. They constantly pursued players and owners to approve the Collective bargaining agreement and even went ahead to assure them of a triple header on Christmas day. George Cohen who is a federal mediator placed himself between the two parties (the players and owners) and tried to speak some sense into them about ironing out their differences and resolving the dispute.
National Basketball Players Association executive director Billy Hunter also dispatched letters to all players so that the may vote in favor of the new collective bargaining agreement.
Conclusion
You’re 78% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.