Scab refs blow a big call tonite | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Scab refs blow a big call tonite

Status
Not open for further replies.
WingU-Conn said:
I said "lasting" damage.

So what the ratings are down for a few weeks? Even if they take a hit for the entire season, most fans will stay, the ones lost will come back. It's been proven time and again. The NFL is far more marketable than the NHL and can better absorb the hit.

You can call it a rounding error, but when you're dealing with unions, once you agree to certain concessions they tend to be permanent. It is incredibly difficult to roll things back once offered. I don't know what the sticking points are for the disagreements, but if it's a 401k vs a pension, The "rounding error" today isn't as nearly as important as the fact the those two retirement plans are completely different and have major impacts to the bottom line. Defined contribution plans are far easier to plan, much more affordable and far less risky for employers. Defined benefit plans are helping to bankrupt the auto industry. What could amount to a rounding error today can grow into serious dollars depending on the foundation of the retirement package.
Expand ...

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8426996/owners-budge-latest-talks-fail-produce-deal-source-says

$100k per team to solve the pension issue.
 
NFL should just embrace the idea of full time refs. Put them on a contract, or pay them a salary, let them have a 401k. I can't believe that the greatest sports league in the world is having an issue like this.

It is really entertaining however.
 
ZooCougar said:
NFL should just embrace the idea of full time refs. Put them on a contract, or pay them a salary, let them have a 401k. I can't believe that the greatest sports league in the world is having an issue like this.

It is really entertaining however.
Expand ...

I think they are resisting full time employees at all.
 
ZooCougar said:
NFL should just embrace the idea of full time refs. Put them on a contract, or pay them a salary, let them have a 401k. I can't believe that the greatest sports league in the world is having an issue like this.

It is really entertaining however.
Expand ...
They don't want a 401k, they want a pension. Huge difference.
 
WhereistheDove? said:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8426996/owners-budge-latest-talks-fail-produce-deal-source-says

$100k per team to solve the pension issue.
Expand ...
You obviously don't understand the difference between a pension and a 401k. And instead of addressing the point of my post you provided today's dollars. If you're not going to actually read my posts, don't bother responding to them.

$100k per team doesn't solve the "pension" issue. It's what it will cost each team today. Take a look at the State of CT's pension burden, maybe you'll learn something.


Lastly, if it's such a minor issue, which doesn't amount to much money, why are the refs refusing to live without it? They are part time employees and they are demanding a benefit that only about 12-15% of the population of full time employees receive. Why don't they take a 401k instead?

They are part time employees who work from August to January with a starting salary somewhere around $75k, and they won't work without a pension?? Must be nice.
 
WingU-Conn said:
They don't want a 401k, they want a pension. Huge difference.
Expand ...

Other than the military and Congress, who gets pensions anymore? Isn't it getting to be less and less in the private sector?
 
.-.
This is going to bring out the fiscal conservative in me and perhaps drive this thread to the Cesspool.

These pension plans, or as I call them, legalized Ponzie Schemes, are what's destroying state and municipal budgets. I don't blame the NFL one bit for holding the line here. Like Wing-U said.....these guys have it so rough as it is......
 
ZooCougar said:
Other than the military and Congress, who gets pensions anymore? Isn't it getting to be less and less in the private sector?
Expand ...
Yes, it is. Outside of government, the unions tend to be consolidated to highly specialized jobs where the employees aren't (or believe they aren't) easy to replace.

Most unions involve companies with a lot of manufacturing. Pratt/UTC, etc. The auto industry, steel workers, and other construction sectors. And of course many non-supervisory jobs in local, state, and federal government. Local government is having an easier time moving away from pensions to 401k style packages than state and feds I think.
 
WingU-Conn said:
You obviously don't understand the difference between a pension and a 401k. And instead of addressing the point of my post you provided today's dollars. If you're not going to actually read my posts, don't bother responding to them.

$100k per team doesn't solve the "pension" issue. It's what it will cost each team today. Take a look at the State of CT's pension burden, maybe you'll learn something.


Lastly, if it's such a minor issue, which doesn't amount to much money, why are the refs refusing to live without it? They are part time employees and they are demanding a benefit that only about 12-15% of the population of full time employees receive. Why don't they take a 401k instead?

They are part time employees who work from August to January with a starting salary somewhere around $75k, and they won't work without a pension?? Must be nice.
Expand ...

You took that article, gleaned information from it that wasn't there, and then in your most condescending voice (I really hope you aren't like that in person) imply that I'm an idiot? And again, you're arguing the straw man fallacy here. I don't think they should be entitled to a pension, but when it comes down to it, the league is a billion dollar organization and I think the inconsequential amount of money you're talking about was not worth the negative press or potential for serious lawsuits had a player been injured. But congrats, you are now an internet tough guy, must be a big moment in your life!
 
WhereistheDove? said:
You took that article, gleaned information from it that wasn't there, and then in your most condescending voice (I really hope you aren't like that in person) imply that I'm an idiot? And again, you're arguing the straw man fallacy here. I don't think they should be entitled to a pension, but when it comes down to it, the league is a billion dollar organization and I think the inconsequential amount of money you're talking about was not worth the negative press or potential for serious lawsuits had a player been injured. But congrats, you are now an internet tough guy, must be a big moment in your life!
Expand ...

I didn't glean anything from it that wasn't there, I provided the facts as reported in the article. They just didn't coincide with your statement that this issue was as simple as a rounding error or about $100k per team.

If there was a straw man argument, it was made when you implied this could all be settled if the owners just decided to kick in an extra $100k per team.

If I was trying to be a tough guy, I would have threatened you. I'm as big a smartass in person as I am on the internet. I still manage to sleep at night.

I apolgize if you I made you feel stupid. When I see someone respond to something I didn't say, while trying to make a point that I think is stupid, I tend to respond to them in kind.
 
WingU-Conn said:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8429885/report-nfl-officials-reach-agreement-end-lockout

Looks like the NFL got most of what they wanted. They have to keep the pensions for current refs, but pensions will be phased out as all new hires will receive 401k contributions.

Just like 90% of the rest of the country. Except most people don't make an average of $150,000 for 6 months of work.
Expand ...
http://deadspin.com/5947376/how-the-referee-deal-got-done

I feel you'd be interested in this.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,326
Messages
4,564,170
Members
10,462
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom