DOCSLIB.ORG

Breaking Rio Tinto's Lockout

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Published by the International Longshore and Warehouse Union DISPATCHER www.ilwu.org Vol 68, No 4 • April/MAY 2010 THE INSIDE NEWS Victory in Boron! PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE 2 Lessons of the lockout 3 June election guide 4 Battle of Ballantyne 6 Longshore Caucus report 7 TRANSITIONS 8 Important NOTICE page 8 Sit down at the British crown: End the lockout in Boron! Almost 2,000 supporters took action at six British Consulates across the country on April 16th, pressuring the British-owned company to end their lockout. San Francisco supporters sat down in the consulate building until officials agreed to meet with a Local 30 member. Breaking Rio Tinto’s Lockout: Join ilWU Canada longshore workers who will celebrate the Battle of Ballantyne on Saturday, June 19, 2010. We’re going back to work page 6 with our heads held high! ith help from their The tentative agreement with Rio • Allowing management to pick and neighbors and sup- Tinto was reached in the early morn- choose who would or wouldn’t porters around the ing hours of May 14th with help from get raises. W ILWU International President Bob world, 570 working families in • Giving management unlimited McEllrath,Vice President Ray Familathe, power to outsource and sub- Boron, CA faced down global and Secretary Treasurer Willie Adams contract work. goliath Rio Tinto. The ILWU Local 30 President Dave Liebengood • Declaring parts of the plant to be Local 30 members who work and the rank and file Negotiating Com- “non-union” where workers had Rio Tinto’s massive mine in Boron mittee asked the ILWU International no union rights. officers to assist them during the final approved a new contract May The new six-year agreement pro- week of intensive negotiations. 15, breaking the company’s 15- tects workers from the worst of the The settlement met members’ key company’s attacks and includes guar- week lockout. The agreement goals of securing good jobs and stop- provides guaranteed raises and anteed annual wage increases of 2.5 ping Rio Tinto’s assault on their union percent. The new agreement will also: a $5,000 per worker bonus, contract. Rio Tinto had been pushing protects full-time jobs and a package of 81 “take-away” demands, 4 Limit outsourcing by requiring full utilization of all workers and seniority rights, and removes part of the company’s ultimatum that was rejected by workers one day machines before any work goes scabs from the workplace.” before the January 31 lockout. Those outside. “Most of us are happy to be ultimatum demands included: 4 Retain seniority protection for going back to work, earning our pay- • Converting full-time jobs into shifts, layoffs, and vacations. checks, and doing the jobs that we part-time positions with skimpy Transfers and promotions will love,” said Terri Judd, Desert Storm benefits. remain subject to seniority for veteran and heavy equipment opera- • Authority to cut employee pay at workers with relatively equal tor who served as an official spokes- any time for any reason – or no qualifications. person for Local 30 members during reason at all. 4 Expand opportunities for over- the lockout. “We’re going back with • Eliminating seniority and allowing time while reducing coercive, our heads held high, but we’re also mandatory overtime. guarded about dealing with a com- discrimination, favoritism, and pany that locked us out.” nepotism. continued on page 2 Postmaster: Send address changes to The Dispatcher, 1188 Franklin St., San Francisco, CA 94109-6800. Postmaster: Send address changes to The Dispatcher, DISPATCHER • April/May 2010 1 PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE ollowing the January 31st answer or do what every individ- side the building. All this was occur- lockout of Local 30 in ual suggests, the International and ring while Locals up and down the Boron, I called for an officer’s the Local would have no direction. Coast, Canada, Alaska and Hawaii F Working with Local President Dave were supporting and donating to meeting, with attorneys and Liebengood is part of the process. the campaign. staff. The Boron lockout would Even though there may be differences Lindsay McLaughlin in Wash- be our number one priority. in strategy, Dave led his committee. ington D.C. and our lobbyists in Sac- Our efforts were to support our All assets were directed to the ramento were already speaking with fight. Working with the President political allies to stand up for working Local 30 members and help ILWU International President Bob them win the lockout against of Local 30 and his committee, we families before Rio Tinto attempted McEllrath talked with Vice President Rio Tinto, one of the largest min- moved to support the families after the same strategy in support of their Joe Biden about the lockout in Boron at ing companies in the world. they lost their paychecks and bene- profits. Rio Tinto, a foreign owned the AFL-CIO meeting on March 1, 2010. fits. We set up an emergency fund, corporation, added to the US and It was no surprise Local 30 had food banks and support groups. The California recession by putting more was a huge undertaking and a been negotiating since September Los Angeles County Federation of people out of work in the name of victory for the labor movement 2009. The contract ended on Labor organized a caravan, collected maximizing profit to investors. This I spent a lot of time explaining to November 4th. Rio Tinto states on donations from thousands of work- added pressure to the already stressed people where Boron is located. Not their website that their strategy is ing families and delivered $50,000 budget of California by requiring anymore. People in the labor move- to consistently find the competitive worth of groceries. extra police, Food Stamps, and ment are talking about the victory at advantage wherever possible. It was Our contacts and allies in the MediCal costs for communities. Boron, not only in the United States, clear that the fight was on. With labor movement gave us important The support from our network but around the world. unemployment in double digits, it support and resources. The AFL- around the world was tremendous: Boron will not be the only strug- is not surprising that workers are CIO headquarters contributed staff the International Transportation gle we face. Currently the Canadian afraid of losing their jobs and may and support to generate pressure on Federation (ITF), Mining and Longshore Division is in the middle be less willing to take risks. This Rio Tinto. International Vice Presi- Maritime, the International Dockers of negotiating with the shipping com- fact was not lost on Rio Tinto, and dent Hawaii Wesley Furtado and I Council (IDC), the AFL-CIO, and panies. Local 6 is negotiating a mas- the timing of their lockout – in the addressed the AFL-CIO Executive Change to Win. Local 30 had the ter agreement for 900 people and middle of our Great Recession – Council on the lockout. I person- community backing with many we have been negotiating for two was no accident. Some companies ally spoke with Vice President Joe small business owners joining Local years to get a first contract for 600 demand cuts because they are under Biden about the situation. From 30 in calling for Rio Tinto to end Rite-Aid workers in Lancaster, Cali- real economic pressure. Some com- there, International Secretary-Trea- the lockout. Local restaurant own- fornia. Boron has tested our resolve panies that are making billions, like surer Willie Adams and Sister Terri ers donated food at the picket line and shows us what to expect when Rio Tinto, will try to take advantage Judd from Local 30 went to Aus- or offered discounts to locked out a powerful employer challenges our just because they can. By any measure, tralia to rally in front of Rio Tinto’s families to help ILWU Local 30 in members and our union. I believe we Rio Tinto was a powerful adversary Australian Headquarters. Vice Presi- their fight to achieve a contract. passed the test , thanks to the courage with a global reputation for playing dent Mainland Ray Familathe went The contract was ultimately and effort by the members and leaders hardball. It was David vs. Goliath. to London with Brother Dave Irish accepted by a 75% affirmative of Local 30, and to the solidarity As President, my job is to work from Local 30 and attended the Rio vote and sets the standard within our ranks and from those with the Local, their President and Tinto Shareholder’s meeting, with a higher for other mining con- around the world who still believe: negotiating committee. If I were to rally from supporting unions out- tracts. Beating back Rio Tinto An injury to one is an injury to all. Breaking Rio Tinto’s Lockout in Boron continued from page 1 we wanted, and we had to make some counts. Members at UFCW Local 8 in up and took on new responsibili- The agreement also includes sev- compromises, but the final contract was Sacramento donated 3,500 pounds of ties during the lockout. Before it was eral compromises that were negotiated a real victory for us.” chicken. Members of ILWU Local 17 over, he had served on the Contract before the final bargaining sessions, A victorious outcome was far from collected enough donations to buy and Action Team (CAT), as a Gate Captain, including the replacement of guaran- certain in the minds of many workers deliver 2,000 pounds of rice. and as a member of the Emergency teed pension benefits with a 401(k) when the company locked them out Local 30 President Dave Liebengood Support Committee that allocated savings plan for all new hires.
Recommended publications
  • The FLSA Final Overtime Rule ® Issue No.1|September 2016 Policies, Programs, Andservices

    The FLSA Final Overtime Rule ® Issue No.1|September 2016 Policies, Programs, Andservices

    Issue No. 1 | September 2016 ® The FLSA Final Overtime Rule A Resource Guide for Student Affairs Professionals Andrew Q. Morse and Holly M. Asimou OVERVIEW The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Final Overtime Rule has substantially increased the salary threshold for exemption from overtime pay. The effect of the Final Rule will be felt by colleges and universities nationwide; many employees will now be eligible for overtime pay unless their salaries are brought in line with the new $47,476 minimum salary threshold or their hours are confined to 40 hours in a given workweek. These changes, set to take effect December 1, 2016, occur at a time when many institutions face persistent budgetary pressure. Moreover, the Final Rule’s impact on new types of employees not traditionally eligible for overtime pay will create the compliance challenge of tracking irregular hours or discerning between work and nonwork activities for many employees. Leaders in student affairs are not only faced with the responsibility to comply with the (Volume 1, Issue 1) 1, Issue (Volume (Volume 1, Issue 1) 1, Issue (Volume Final Rule, but to also ensure the operational sustainability of their departments or divisions. This resource guide offers a tour through the Final Rule and existing overtime laws and regulations. Further, this guide provides considerations and cautions to support the compliance and management responsibilities of leaders in student affairs. NASPA Policy and Practice Series and Practice Policy NASPA NASPA Policy and Practice Series Series and Practice Policy NASPA 1 1 THE AUTHORS Andrew Q. Morse, PhD, is director for policy research and advocacy with NASPA–Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education’s Research and Policy Institute.
  • GLOSSARY of COLLECTIVE BARGAINING TERMS and SELECTED LABOR TOPICS

    GLOSSARY of COLLECTIVE BARGAINING TERMS and SELECTED LABOR TOPICS

    GLOSSARY of COLLECTIVE BARGAINING TERMS and SELECTED LABOR TOPICS ABEYANCE – The placement of a pending grievance (or motion) by mutual agreement of the parties, outside the specified time limits until a later date when it may be taken up and processed. ACTION - Direct action occurs when any group of union members engage in an action, such as a protest, that directly exposes a problem, or a possible solution to a contractual and/or societal issue. Union members engage in such actions to spotlight an injustice with the goal of correcting it. It further mobilizes the membership to work in concerted fashion for their own good and improvement. ACCRETION – The addition or consolidation of new employees or a new bargaining unit to or with an existing bargaining unit. ACROSS THE BOARD INCREASE - A general wage increase that covers all the members of a bargaining unit, regardless of classification, grade or step level. Such an increase may be in terms of a percentage or dollar amount. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE – An agent of the National Labor Relations Board or the public sector commission appointed to docket, hear, settle and decide unfair labor practice cases nationwide or statewide in the public sector. They also conduct and preside over formal hearings/trials on an unfair labor practice complaint or a representation case. AFL-CIO - The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations is the national federation of unions in the United States. It is made up of fifty-six national and international unions, together representing more than 12 million active and retired workers.
  • The Employee Free Choice Act: the Biggest Change in Labor Law in 60 Years by Robert Quinn and John Leschak

    The Employee Free Choice Act: the Biggest Change in Labor Law in 60 Years by Robert Quinn and John Leschak

    LABOR LAW REGIONAL LABOR REVIEW, Fall 2009 The Employee Free Choice Act: The Biggest Change in Labor Law in 60 Years by Robert Quinn and John Leschak One of the most contentious proposals of the 2008 Presidential campaign and of the current Congressional season in Washington is the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). Supported by President Obama and opposed by Senator John McCain and most other Republicans, EFCA would be the most significant change to federal labor law in over sixty years. First, EFCA would allow the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) to certify a union without an election if a majority of workers voluntarily sign cards authorizing a union to represent them (this provision is also known as “card check”). Second, EFCA would impose new penalties on employers who violate workers’ rights during initial organizing campaigns. And third, EFCA would permit bargaining disputes between an employer and union to be decided by arbitration during first-time contract negotiations. However, several powerful groups are opposed to any change. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has launched a vociferous campaign against EFCA’s “Card Check” provision, which they claim will lead to intimidation and coercion in the workplace.1 Congressional Republicans have also been outspoken opponents of card check. Last February, Republican Senators Jim DeMint (S.C.) and Mike Enzi (Wyo.) introduced the Secret Ballot Protection Act, S. 478. This bill would make it illegal for an employer to voluntarily recognize a union through card check and would require NLRB elections. While many are opposed to EFCA, it cannot be denied that reform is needed.
  • Single-Employer and Multi-Employer Lockouts Under the Taft-Hartley

    Single-Employer and Multi-Employer Lockouts Under the Taft-Hartley

    SINGLE EMPLOYER AND MULTI-EMPLOYER LOCK- OUTS UNDER THE TAFT-HARTLEY ACT BERNARD D. MELTZER* P HE growth of multi-employer bargaining' has been accompanied by increased litigation regarding the legality of the so-called multi-employ- . er "defensive" lockout, i.e., a lockout by the unstruck members of a multi-employer bargaining unit, who are subject to an express or implied strike threat, in response to a strike called against one or more members of their group after an impasse in negotiations for a master contract. Although such a lockout may raise anti-trust questions, 2 as well as questions under the Taft- Hartley Act, recent litigation has arisen exclusively under the Taft-Hartley Act. This litigation has made only one thing clear: The NLRB, according to the reviewing courts, is always wrong. Thus the initial position taken by a majority of the Board (pre-Eisenhower), that defensive lockouts are illegal under the Taft-Hartley Act, was rejected by the courts of appeals in three circuits. 3 A new * Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School. xFor estimates of the number of employees involved consult Collective Bargaining with Associations and Groups of Employers, 64 Monthly Lab. Rev. 397,398 (1947); Collective Bar- gaining Structures: The Employer Bargaining Unit, Bureau of Labor Statistics (1953). The former is discussed in Pierson, Prospects for Industry-Wide Bargaining, 3 Indust. & Lab. Rel. Rev. 341, 360 (1950). 2The author plans to discuss these questions in a forthcoming issue of this Review. 3Morand Bros. Beverage Co. v. NLRB, 190 F. 2d 576 (C.A.

  • Union Issues in the Solid Waste Industry

    archive LittlerThis article recently appeared in the National Solid Wastes Management Association, September 2005. Union Issues in the Solid Waste Industry by Ronald J. Holland and Philip Paturzo Summary sentatives of employees for collec- rates above the national average. In tive bargaining purposes, and the contrast, states in the Southeast and Union membership in America has bargaining process itself. It also Southwest tended to have far less been in a downward spiral for the addresses recent strikes in the in- union density. past 50 years. However, this does dustry and the ways employers can not mean that the private solid prepare in advance to reduce the Given the steady decline in union waste industry can rest easy. Be- impact of a strike. Finally, the pa- membership throughout the coun- cause the type of work performed per looks at management initiatives try, the private solid waste industry by industry employees cannot be that should be used to reduce the should not be concerned about new sent abroad to reduce labor costs possibility that employees will seek organizing efforts, right? Wrong. and the nature of the business is union representation. recession-resistant, unions recently The Teamsters boasts that it rep- have targeted solid waste compa- Background resents over 25,000 private solid nies. Specifically, the International waste industry workers.2 And it is Brotherhood of Teamsters, the larg- Labor unions have existed in not content to stop there. In 2004, est union player in the field, has America since the 1800s. By the Teamsters President James P. Hoffa publicly vowed to unionize private mid-1950s, at the height of the la- said: “It is the priority of the Team- solid waste companies nationwide bor movement, roughly 35 percent sters Union to bring justice to solid and has expended significant re- of the American workforce was waste workers throughout the coun- sources to achieve that goal.
  • Bargaining Lockout: an Impatient Warrior Robert P

    Bargaining Lockout: an Impatient Warrior Robert P

    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Notre Dame Law School: NDLScholarship Notre Dame Law Review Volume 40 | Issue 2 Article 1 2-1-1965 Bargaining Lockout: An Impatient Warrior Robert P. Duvin Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Robert P. Duvin, Bargaining Lockout: An Impatient Warrior, 40 Notre Dame L. Rev. 137 (1965). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol40/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOTRE DAME RWVEP VOL. XL FEBRUARY, 1965 No. 2 THE BARGAINING LOCKOUT: AN IMPATIENT WARRIOR Robert P. Duvin* A lockout is a temporary refusal by an employer to furnish work to his employees. Although the word itself carries no invidious connotation, most students of collective bargaining and labor law have for many years rejected its acceptability as a negotiating pressure tactic. In the last fifteen years there have been very few cases in which the lockout was employed solely for the purpose of achieving bargaining objectives. When used in this manner, the lockout is the counterpart of the strike and, quite clearly, a potentially powerful economic weapon. Therefore, one can only assume that the infrequent appear- ance of such a potent tactic - in an arena not yet free from the stench of yester- year's hostilities - results from a widely held belief that it is illegal.
  • The Double Lockout: How Low Income Families Will Be Locked out of Fair Living Standards

    The Double Lockout: How Low Income Families Will Be Locked out of Fair Living Standards

    The Double Lockout: How low income families will be locked out of fair living standards Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 2 Chapter one: The impact of benefit uprating on poverty by Lindsay Judge ................. 8 Chapter two: Social security and working households by Declan Gaffney ................. 12 Chapter three: The economic impact of uprating policy by Jonathan Portes ............ 20 Chapter four: The reality for low income households by Tracy Shildrick and Rob Macdonald .................................................................................................................. 26 Chapter five: Public attitudes to social security by Ben Baumberg ............................ 31 Chapter six: Secure Futures: A vision for sustainable social security by Alison Garnham ..................................................................................................................... 38 1 Executive Summary This short report examines the potential impact of the decision, announced in the Autumn Statement 2012, to uprate most benefits and tax credits by one per cent for the next three years, less than the rate of inflation. Analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies found that this constitutes a real terms cut of four per cent to the benefits and tax credits affected across the period.i The report examines the claims used to justify the decision, and its potential impact on families, with contributions from a range of experts. In
  • Precarious Work in Asia Pacific Has Been Identified by Trade Unions Across the Region As a Central Concern for Working People

    Precarious Work in Asia Pacific Has Been Identified by Trade Unions Across the Region As a Central Concern for Working People

    A 10 country study by The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and ITUC Asia-Pacific 2014 Asia Pacific Region Precarious work in the work Precarious FOREWARD ..........................................................................................................................................5 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................7 COUNTRY PROFILES ...........................................................................................................................13 Australia .............................................................................................................................................14 Cambodia ...........................................................................................................................................19 Indonesia............................................................................................................................................23 Japan .................................................................................................................................................29 Contents Korea, Republic of ...............................................................................................................................37 Nepal .................................................................................................................................................47 New Zealand ......................................................................................................................................52
  • Employers' Use of Lockouts Under the Employment Contracts Act 1991: a New Balan ~Ce of Power?

    Employers' Use of Lockouts Under the Employment Contracts Act 1991: a New Balan ~Ce of Power?

    New ,Zealand Journal of Industrial Relations, 17(3): 319-331 Employers' Use of Lockouts under the Employment Contracts Act 1991: A New Balan ~ce of Power? Rebecca Ma~cfie* Since May 1991 lockouts have become a more familiar featu~e of New Zealand's industrial re,lations environment, and have been used to powerful effect by employers on a number of well-publicised occasions. l.t has been argued that the Employment Contracts Act is not responsible for this development. This arg,wnent rests primarily on the fact that the ECA 's lockout provisions were inher,ited from the Labour Relations Act. This paper examines the case law on lockouts under the ECA, and argues that the bargaining environment created by the ECA has made the lockout a more powerful, and the~efore more attractive, weapon than was the case under the LRA. Since the 1987 Labour Relations Act, Parliament has recognised the right of workers to strike and employers to lock out, free of the tmeat of civil action, in certain closely defined circumstances. These tools of industrial bargaining are, in theory, equal and counterbalancing, giving employers and employees limited right to bring coercive pressure to bear on the opposite party. As Colgan J commented in NZ Public Service. Association v Design power NZ Ltd 16/4/92 WEC 17N92: It is .. noteworthy that the power to lawfully lockout employees is o~ten said 'lO be the mirror image of and quid pro quo of dte right or power of employees to str&e to the same end Since the enactment of the Employment ~Contracts A ~ct (ECA), lockouts have become a much more prominent feature of New Zealand's industrial relations landscape, and a considerably more popular element of ~employers' industrial relations armoury.
  • The Key to Unlocking the Partial Lockout: a Discussion of the NLRB’S Decisions in Midwest Generation and Bunting Bearings

    The Key to Unlocking the Partial Lockout: a Discussion of the NLRB’S Decisions in Midwest Generation and Bunting Bearings

    EWELL.DOC 4/16/2008 11:43:56 AM The Key to Unlocking the Partial Lockout: A Discussion of the NLRB’s Decisions in Midwest Generation and Bunting Bearings C. Quincy Ewell* I. Introduction Collective bargaining consists of negotiations between an employer and a group of employees,1 who are usually represented by a labor union, in an effort to determine the conditions of employment.2 Collective bargaining is governed by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or the Act), which sets forth guidelines permitting and proscribing certain activity.3 In other words, when an employer and labor union sit down to negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement—the final covenant reached between the employer and the employees—employers and employees are justified in taking some actions but not others.4 For instance, while collective bargaining, a labor union must bargain in good * J.D. Candidate, The Dickinson School of Law of the Pennsylvania State University, 2008; B.A., magna cum laude, Sociology, Howard University, 2005. The author would like to thank his family, especially Doris and Tiffany, for all their love, support, and encouragement. The author would also like to thank Kris Harrison for her insightful suggestions and advice in developing this Comment. 1. See generally HAROLD W. DAVEY ET AL., CONTEMPORARY COLLECTIVE BARGAINING 3-4 (4th ed. 1982) (discussing the parties in collective bargaining). 2. See 29 U.S.C. § 158(d) (2006) (“[T]o bargain collectively is the performance of the mutual obligation of the employer and the representative of the employees to meet at reasonable times and confer in good faith with respect to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment.
  • 1913 the Great Lockout: a Survey

    1913 the Great Lockout: a Survey

    1913 The Great Lockout: A Survey Paul O'Brien The 1913 lockout was a pivotal mo- the Irish Transport and General Workers ment in Irish history. This essay will Union (ITGWU) and the lockout in 1913. present a survey of the literature published He arrived in Belfast in January 1907. to date on the lockout. These publica- Within a year Larkin had established the tions together provide us with an impor- National Union of Dock Labourers in every tant archive documenting and analysing port in Ireland, but his militant methods the social and political context of 1913, alarmed the leadership of the union. In while at the same time examining the key December 1908 he was suspended from his strategic positions and events leading up position within the NUDL. A few weeks to and surrounding the lockout. They also later, on December 28^th, Larkin launched provide us with a valuable insight into the a breakaway union: the Irish Transport political men that were Jim Larkin and and General Workers Union. The ITGWU James Connolly. represented a new style of trade unionism The historical response to the lockout that reached out to the unskilled worker. can be divided into four waves. Firstly, that produced during, and in the immedi- ate aftermath, of the lockout. Secondly, that written in the period 1920 to 1970 when there was little interest in Labour history. Thirdly, the `new labour history' associated with the emergence of the Irish Labour History Society (1973) between 1970 and 2000. Lastly, a series of pub- lications, particularly the collected works, letters, and journalism of James Connolly published to coincide with the upcoming Jim Larkin during the Lockout centenary of the lockout.
  • Some Keys to the NBA Lockout Grant M

    Some Keys to the NBA Lockout Grant M

    Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal Volume 16 | Issue 2 Article 4 1999 Some Keys to the NBA Lockout Grant M. Hayden Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlelj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Hayden, Grant M. (1999) "Some Keys to the NBA Lockout," Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal: Vol. 16: Iss. 2, Article 4. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlelj/vol16/iss2/4 This document is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Hayden: Some Keys to the NBA Lockout ESSAYS SOME KEYS TO THE NBA LOCKOUT* Grant M. Hayden** I. INTRODUCTION When it came to labor relations in professional sports, basket- ball was always different. The National Basketball Association ("NBA") and the players' union were proud of the fact that they worked in the only major American sport that had never lost a game to a labor dispute.1 That all changed last year when, failing to come to agreement on a new contract, the NBA owners locked out the players for over six months, resulting in the cancellation of 423 regular season games. Basketball, it seemed, had descended into the greedy narcissism that plagued every other major sport. The 1998-99 NBA lockout, like the 1994 Major League Baseball strike, may have serious consequences for the future of the game.