U.S. women's team does not have right to strike: judge

[Eugene]

Source: Reuters

The United States women's soccer team does not have the right to strike for better conditions and wages in 2016, a U.S. district court judge ruled in Chicago on Friday.

Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman ruled that the players were bound by a no-strike provision in their contract with U.S. Soccer. The decision comes only two months before the U.S. women are due to defend their Olympic title in Rio de Janeiro.

"Today, Judge Coleman ruled in favor of U.S. Soccer and affirmed that the existing CBA (collective bargaining agreement) with the U.S. Women's National Team Players Association is valid through the end of 2016, including the no-strike, no lockout provision," U.S. Soccer said in a statement.

"We are pleased with the Court's decision and remain committed to negotiating a new CBA to take effect at the beginning of next year."

The ruling was a victory for U.S. Soccer, which had argued that though the team's collective bargaining agreement had expired in 2012, it lived on in a memorandum of understanding signed in 2013.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-soccer-usa-women-idUSKCN0YP2GM

---

World | Fri Jun 3, 2016 8:05pm EDT

[Travis_0004]

1. Its a bit deceptive to claim womens soccer revenue is equal to mens soccer

When they had a world cup and the men did not, the women brought in more money. Over a 4 year span its not even close, and the men have always had higher raitings and more revenue.

[braddy]

2. Our women's team is ranked number one, Australia's is ranked number 5.

[rpannier]

3. So... they can just quit?

Then where would US Soccer be?

Women would likely be 7th or 8th or worse

[Crash2Parties]

4. Gee, why don't all employers just add that to their contracts?

And since when is the U.S. Soccer team equal in importance to the safety of people as air traffic controllers?

[Omaha Steve]

7. No lockout-strike is standard in most contracts while the contract is enforce

But that has been changing.

They can't strike. Soccer can't lock them out or say NO WORK. It protects against a wildcat strike for the company.

This case the workers will get paid (once the legal fight is over) because the lockout wasn't legal: http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Corporate-Greed/NLRB-Reaffirms-Kellogg-Lockout-Was-Illegal-Orders-Workers-to-Be-Made-Whole


http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Organizing-Bargaining/Employers-Overreach-with-Growing-Lockout-Tactics



Employers ‘Overreach’ with Growing Lockout Tactics

10/11/2012 Mike Hall

The growing number of lockouts—where employers close the doors or gates in order to wring concessions out of workers—“represents an overreach on the part of employers,” writes Minnesota AFL-CIO President Shar Knutson in an op-ed piece today in the Minneapolis StarTribune.

For examples of these lockouts, Knutson points to the more than 13-month lockout of American Crystal Sugar workers, the NFL lockouts of referees and players, Cooper Tires recent lockout and this month’s lockout of the Minnesota Orchestra (American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada [AFM] Local 30-73), where management is seeking 30% to 50% pay cuts.

Knutson writes: Lockouts have not been very common in the past, because usually businesses would prefer to keep operating and getting the value of workers' labor. But in the current economic climate, even profitable enterprises are seeking to wrangle a few extra dollars out of workers.

FULL story at link.

[unblock]

5. as if they couldn't throw a game.

the sports equivalent of the work slowdown....

[Fuddnik]

6. Fuck'em. Strike anyway.

[mdbl]

8. People don't seem to care what they sign anymore

So they find themselves screwed and realize they signed away their rights to do anything about it.

[turbinetree]

9. Again get rid of Taft-Hartley----------------------

http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1036


Honk-----------------for a political revolution Bernie 2016