The NHL and the NHLPA announced a settlement Tuesday to resolve an antitrust lawsuit filed in 2012 by a civil engineer and a local union representing contractors who work for the league.
The settlement covers two key points: that the NHL would be allowed to use civil engineering and contract terms to define what constitutes a “civil engineering” work and a “contract” in the NHL’s collective bargaining agreement, and that the union would be permitted to request the league to revise its contracts with its members.
The NHL, which has been sued numerous times by civil engineers and civil engineering contractors over its use of contract terms in negotiations over its expansion franchise, has argued that its bargaining strategy, which allows it to negotiate contract terms with members of its unions at the bargaining table, protects members and the league from a lawsuit.
It has also contended that, as a result, the league can negotiate better contracts with civil engineers than with contractors, and is unlikely to be able to achieve the same results with contractors because of the bargaining structure.
In an affidavit filed with the court, the NHL said that it would be “unable to effectively use civil engineer terms and conditions” to define its contract terms.
The two sides are now in a negotiating position over a number of other issues, including a proposed settlement on the league’s collective-bargaining agreement with the union.
The agreement says that a union can only use the terms of a collective bargaining deal if the terms are negotiated in good faith.
But, as we have seen, it can also use contract terms that are unfair or deceptive.
We believe the settlement affirms the importance of this approach, and our understanding that the terms would not be negotiated in a manner that was unfair to civil engineers or to the NHL.””
This settlement will not change the scope or content of our collective bargaining agreements,” the league said. “
They merely change the legal framework and, to the extent possible, allow the NHL to define terms in a way that reflects its goals and objectives in a fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory manner.”
“This settlement will not change the scope or content of our collective bargaining agreements,” the league said.
“The terms have been defined in good conscience and we intend to continue to work in good-faith with our unions.”
The NHL and union officials have been in discussions about the settlement for some time, but the parties were not able to reach a deal after several rounds of talks.
The NHLPA, which represents a small number of contractors, is one of the most prominent and powerful of the league owners.
The league’s contract with the NHL union, meanwhile, has been plagued by allegations of labor abuse in recent years.
In November 2015, the union voted in favor of an amendment to the union contract that would allow the league and its union to use contract language that was not defined in the collective-Bargaining Agreement to define contract terms, which it would not have been able to do under the existing collective bargaining law.
The amendment, known as a “Contract Amendment,” passed a third vote in December 2015, and the two sides have been at odds over its wording ever since.