Skip to content

NHL wins Alberta Labour Board case

Oct 10, 2012, 5:28 PM EDT

Edmonton Oilers v Calgary Flames Getty Images

The Alberta Labour Board ruled in favor of the NHL today, shooting down the NHLPA’s attempt to block the league from locking out the Calgary Flames and Edmonton Oilers, TSN reports.

This comes a little less than a month after Quebec’s board backed the NHL in a similar players’ effort regarding the Montreal Canadiens.

Click here if you’d like to read up on the hearing in PDF form.

If you’re not that desperate for a lockout diversion, The Los Angeles Times’ Helene Elliott compiled some of the highlights.

Elliott’s first excerpt from the Alberta Labour Board’s decision:

“We are of the opinion this is a case where it makes labour relations sense to exercise our discretion not to make a declaration of unlawful conduct and not to issue any remedy.”

The Alberta Labour Board also noted that it would be odd to make a decision based on just two of the NHL’s 30 franchises:

“Finally, for this Board to intervene in this dispute and declare the lockout illegal as it relates to the Alberta teams and their players (or otherwise interfere with the progress of collective bargaining on a league-wide basis) would be detrimental to the ongoing relationship between the parties and the ability of the league to function properly. The result of such an intervention by this Board would be to effectively remove the Calgary Flames and Edmonton Oilers teams and players from the league-wide collective bargaining process that the parties have historically engaged in and has been established and recognized under the NLRA.”

In other words: you two are on your own.

  1. finfan88shark - Oct 10, 2012 at 5:42 PM

    The Labour Board was paid for and bought by the NHL owners, no doubt about it. Because they did not even follow their own laws and rules when they made this “Not surprising” ruling. Wonder how much money they lined their pockets with?

    • blomfeld - Oct 10, 2012 at 6:04 PM

      Agreed … and say what you will about the KHL, but never in a “million years” would they ever allow corruption on a scale like this … never !

  2. finfan88shark - Oct 11, 2012 at 3:17 AM

    The Labour boards decision is wrong on a number of basis, but even reading the decision one can see no reference to anyone on the players side. 99% of references are made towards William Daly’s comments, no mention of players comments or concerns. Additionally the report states in 29) The the NHL ANNOUNCED that the NHL and all 30 teams were unanimous decision to favor a lockout. Yet two issues are questionable here. 1. Phoenix is owned by the NHL and therefore does not have a legal right to vote for a lockout, and 2. There was no roll call or no PROOF of the unanimous decision. The Labour Board is a legal entity yet it used heresay as part of their evidence for making their decision.

    Finally the Labour board mentions in 31, that making the lockout in Alberta not legal would have no overall effect on the NHL teams itself. Obviously the NHL disagreed with this statement hence there reason for fight this dispute to begin with. The Labour Board failed to recognize that both Calgary and Edmonton would of had to have paid there players there full salaries if they over turned the lockout, and this in turn would most likely lead to pressure upon other teams to settle this dispute.

    Finally the Labour Relations Board, failed to mention the effect this lockout has on workers at the Arena who are shutout of pay because of a dispute in which they are not part of.

  3. phillyphannn83 - Oct 11, 2012 at 4:01 AM

    I commemted on these stories waaayyy back when they were first posted back in August and said these local labour boards have no jurisdiction over the other teams in the league and therefore, cannot make a determination to declare the lockout illegal. I said they don’t have the authority and all you Canadians that comment here told me I was wrong. You called me a stupid American, which was entirely uncalled for. And wouldn’t you know, BOTH labour boards came to the exact same determination: they don’t have the jurisdiction to tell any team outside their province what they have to do. Seems this “stupid American” knows a little more than you gave me credit for!!

  4. finfan88shark - Oct 11, 2012 at 10:52 AM

    Well I’m an American and I disagree with what you are saying

  5. finfan88shark - Oct 11, 2012 at 11:01 AM

    The problem was that the Labour board looked at the broader issue and used that in their decision. And therein lyes the problem. They had no legal basis to use the broader issue as the local area players never argued that issue. What the board did was side step the legal issue brought to them. Just the fact the never mentioned a plaintiffs name yet mentioned Daly’s name numerous times tells you this decision was bought and paid for.

  6. finfan88shark - Oct 11, 2012 at 11:01 AM

    The problem was that the Labour board looked at the broader issue and used that in their decision. And therein lyes the problem. They had no legal basis to use the broader issue as the local area players never argued that issue. What the board did was side step the legal issue brought to them. Just the fact the never mentioned a plaintiffs name yet mentioned Daly’s name numerous times tells you this decision was bought and paid for.

Featured video

Detroit must exploit Boston's young D
Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. T. Oshie (4675)
  2. E. Malkin (4106)
  3. M. Duchene (4058)
  4. B. Bishop (3316)
  5. H. Zetterberg (3023)
  1. O. Palat (2849)
  2. D. Backes (2799)
  3. V. Tarasenko (2771)
  4. S. Mason (2728)
  5. R. Getzlaf (2561)