First, a confession - I’m a bit of a sports junky. I’m not crazy about it or anything, but I do keep up with the major bulletin points as they happen. Part of that involves visiting ESPN.com periodically. While there, I found an article by Kevin Bryant titled, “In failing Vick, NFL Players Association fails itself“. I was intrigued right off the bat, right up until I read this:

It is unclear whether Upshaw is at the bargaining table now in negotiating a settlement for Vick’s suspension and parameters for — however remote — a potential return to the NFL. He’s vacationing until after Labor Day. But neither Vick nor Pacman Jones nor Tank Johnson is the union’s real issue.

The issue is precedent.

The reason is clear. The responsibility of a union is to defend its membership — every time, all the time, if for no other reasons than to send a dissenting vote to management that its membership always will be protected by a strong union and to alert the commissioner that his powers always will be checked by an advocate for the players. The union’s message should be that a commissioner cannot simply do whatever he wants.

That right there is why unions are a declining power in this country. The mindset that a union must always be adversarial against management, even when management is right, just to show that there is a limit to managerial power is not only ridiculous but counterproductive. What would the NFLPA gain by defending Michael Vick? Nothing - Vick is about to become a convicted felon. He’s going to jail for at least a year, probably more. It’s not like the NFLPA is going to get him a football career in prison, and no fan base in the country would accept him on their team. So, the NFLPA would burn precious political capital and gain… poor PR and a hostile ownership?

Then comes the point…

So the union has an understanding that it won’t be blindsided by a runaway commissioner, adopting a position closer to equity shareholder than skeptical watchdog. It has labor peace and can take comfort in not worrying about losing public goodwill during contract years or losing face should its membership crack during pressurized labor negotiations. The union seems comforted that it is treated as an inside player instead of a hostile entity. But what good is maintaining the peace if it is not accompanied by power?

Noise is not equal to power. The Major League Baseball Player’s Association has made a lot of noise over the years. Where has it taken them? Baseball is becoming increasingly irrelevant while football ratings increase. When records are broken, everyone assumes it has something to do with steroids or human growth hormone. Congress has stepped in where the owners fear to tread, bringing in former players and conducting investigations. Is this really in the best interest of the players? How does having the nation slowly turn their back on their careers and accomplishments aid them? Meanwhile, the NFL is turning what would normally be a PR disaster into a coup - they’ve severely punished Pacman Jones, they’re probably going to expel Michael Vick, and, even though the Michael Vick story couldn’t get much worse, nobody’s going to stop watching football because of it because the NFL took responsibility and dealt with the situation appropriately. Meanwhile, ratings are through the roof, income for the owners and players is increasing quickly and steadily, we have football on the radio and TV almost 24/7/365, and people are clamoring for more.

Who’s approach is really better here?

Trackback URI | Comments RSS