SPT 290 Final Draft

Running Head: NFL COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT 1
NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement
Andrew Deichert
Kutztown University
SPT 290
Dr. Cebula
April 24, 2015

NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement
A collective bargaining agreement is a necessary document linking an employer to a
trade union. The agreement has information regarding employment details and terms that
are apart of the employment. These agreements are commonplace in the United States
within companies in order to create specific work related provisions (Duhaime, n.d.). This
is also the case within the National Football League. The NFL first recognized the players
association as a representative of players in 1968 and is known as the National Football
League Players Association. After a short lockout, they established the first collective
bargaining agreement in their history (Chronology, 2011). In the following years, the
NFLPA voted in a president, John Mackey, and established a strong core with that move
(Chronology, 2011). Since the defining period of the NFL CBA in the late 1960s and early
1970s, presidents have come and gone, and so have different collective bargaining
agreements, but the union itself has stayed strong and continues to deal with major work
issues in the sport of football. The CBA covers items such as revenue sharing between
owners and players, free agency, contracts, and many other items (NFL, 2011). The
Collective Bargaining Agreement is an integral part of the relationship between the NFL
players and the league owners.
The current NFL collective bargaining agreement, which was established on August
4th, 2011, consists of 70 articles, with each article including several sections of information
detailing the specific article (NFL, 2011). This most recent agreement is for ten seasons
from the 2011 season and ending after the 2020 season (Rosenthal, 2011). The new CBA

benefits both the players and the owners in different ways. First, the revenue sharing
model for the new CBA consisted of a player-owner split of 47-53%. The players receive an
average of 47% and they can receive up to 48.5% (Rosenthal, 2011). This model drops the
players’ revenue percentage by 4 points, however, in the previous CBA the owners would
skim off $1 billion dollars from the players revenue and that is not applied in the new CBA
(Breer, 2012). Under the new revenue split model, the players will receive there 47-48.5%
from All Revenue. In previous years since 2006’ CBA, the players received 50% from Total
Revenues (Deubert, 2011). Under the 2011 CBA, the players are actually gaining a more
definite, guaranteed piece of the pie (Deubert, 2011). Another major change includes
rookie contract terms and compensation. Under the new CBA each team has a determined
pool of money to spend on their new draft picks. Before this CBA was established, teams
would negotiate with the rookies based on where they were selected, and massive
contracts would be awarded to those players who were taken at the top of the draft. Under
the new model, there is a scale that is set so large rookie contracts with bigger sums of
guaranteed money are not handed out (Rosenthal, 2011).
Signing this new CBA had positive implications for both the owners and the players,
but it also carried some negative impact on both sides, as well. To begin, the owners, as
well as the players are going to enjoy the stability of the 10-year deal (Rosenthal, 2011).
This allows both sides to have time to put any CBA issues aside for a long period of time.
The owners will also be happy with the fact that the players took a smaller piece of the
revenue pie to get other agendas accomplished. The players are taking about a 4%
decrease in the revenue sharing overall, giving the owners a decent chunk of money that
wasn’t there before (Volin, 2013). Since the 2011 CBA was established, there has been a

dramatic increase for a number of NFL teams. The Green Bay Packers are a great example,
as they recorded a net income of $85.8 million after 2 seasons of the new CBA. Before the
new CBA was put into place, the Packers only netted $22.3 million in the 2 previous
seasons (Volin, 2013). The owners also will benefit from the new rookie wage scale. Before,
on the old scale, players selected at the top of the draft would receive large sums of
guaranteed money (Rosenthal, 2011). For example, the last top pick in the old CBA, Sam
Bradford, received around 50$ million dollars in guaranteed money. Cam Newton, the first
top pick under the new CBA received less than half that sum, $22 million (Rosenthal, 2011).
Essentially, this new rookie wage scale pays the players based on where they are drafted in
terms of picks. This model is used in the NBA and the idea is curtailed to prevent a large
number of rookie holdouts, which happened under the previous rookie scale (Deubert,
2011). This money saved benefits the owners because they now have extra funds to
allocate to other parts of the team, or to pocket themselves (Volin, 2013).
Although the owners have received a promising gain from the new CBA, the players
did not do too bad either. For starters, the idea of an 18 game season, something the
players denied from day 1, was put off until 2013 initially (Rosenthal, 2011). Today in
2015, an 18 game season is still far away and is not a possibility at this moment for at least
the next 2 seasons. The players have also gained from an increased salary cap and salary
floor. The salary cap initially decreased in the 2011 year, but in the years following,
including 2015, the cap has increased by a total of 23$ million (Rosenthal, 2011). A new
salary floor was also established. The salary floor states that teams must spend a certain
amount of their cap space each year or they will be penalized. In 2011-12 it was 99% of the
cap, from 2013-2020 teams must spend at least 89% of cap space each year (Rosenthal,

2011). A salary cap floor is beneficial for players because it requires teams to spend more
money on the players, whether it is giving out larger contracts or bringing in more players.
Player safety was also addressed with the new CBA, as players are required to participate
in less padded practices during two-a-days and also during the regular season (Breer,
2012). Teams also have more off days during times such as a bye week.
The current CBA deals with a large number of articles and sections as stated
previously, however it is important to focus on areas that get national attention from the
media and other news outlets. In previous NFL seasons, most notably the past two seasons,
there have been an increasing number of discipline issues revolving around domestic
violence, assault and drug use. These are major issues that are handled by the league and
how they handle these situations is detailed in the CBA under different sections of
discipline. First, there is the role of the commissioner of the NFL in issuing his form of
discipline and this is outlined in the current CBA under Article 46, Section 1 (NFL, 2011).
Specifically the article states:
“All disputes involving a fine or suspension imposed upon a player for conduct on
the playing field (other than as described in Subsection (b) below) or involving
action taken against a player by the Commissioner for conduct detrimental to the
integrity of, or public confidence in, the game of professional football, will be
processed exclusively as follows: the Commissioner will promptly send written
notice of his action to the player, with a copy to the NFLPA. Within three (3)
business days following such written notification, the player affected thereby, or the
NFLPA with the player’s approval, may appeal in writing to the Commissioner”
(NFL, 2011).
This subsection details how the commissioner himself imposes both fines and suspensions.
Appeals are allowed for all fines and suspensions within the NFL under commissioner
discipline, as is detailed in the CBA (NFL, 2011). For the appeals heard for fines and

suspensions under commissioner discipline, officers are appointed to hear cases based on
whether the fine/suspension falls under subsection 1(a) as referenced above or subsection
1(b) which refers to fines or suspensions dealing with unnecessary roughness on the field
(e.g. Ndamukong Suh stomping incident). Appeals are heard for a majority of fines and
suspension in the NFL, and sometimes the appeals process is dragged through to an
arbitration case (NFL, 2011). A prime example is the Ray Rice case from this past year.
After receiving a suspension for his role in domestic violence against his wife, Rice received
a suspension of two games initially (Rice, 2014). After the elevator video leaked, Rice was
suspended indefinitely. Rice immediately took the case to an arbitration hearing,
something he is entitled to under article 43 of the CBA (NFL, 2011). Because Rice was able
to appeal his suspension and take it to an arbitration hearing, he was able to have his
indefinite suspension revoked and was reinstated, showing the importance of certain
provisions in the CBA and their impact on disciplinary issues (Rice, 2014). In the article All
Four Quarters, Commissioner Discipline is examined and it is noted that Commissioner
Goodell had a heavy hand when he became commissioner in 2006 (Deubert, 2012). There
was speculation that the players would try to get him to agree to tone down his disciplinary
action (Deubert, 2012). However, the NFLPA made no impact and his disciplinary authority
remained relatively the same. The only change made was the ability to have fines reduced
for first and second time offenders (Deubert, 2012).
Next, another similar section that has a big impact on the players and teams is
Article 42, Club Discipline. Unlike Commissioner Discipline, Club Discipline primarily deals
with situations relating to smaller team violations, not violations related to drugs or
assault. Some of these minor offenses have been discussed in class and are noted in Section

1 of Article 42. Some examples are – being overweight carries a maximum fine of $470
dollars per day, unexcused late reporting for mandatory off-season mini-camp holds a
maximum fine of up to $1,770, ejection from a game carries a maximum fine of $25,000 and
loss of a team playbook can cost a player up to $9,440 (NFL, 2011). These are just a few of
many terms in Article 42 that detail what a club can fine one of their players for. Club
Discipline also mentions in Section 2 of Article 42 that a published list of discipline that can
be opposed be made available to the players at the commencement of training camps (NFL,
2011). In Section 3 of this article, Uniformity is discussed. Uniformity as is described in the
2011 CBA and it states that the clubs must use a uniform system of fining and suspending
for all players (NFL, 2011). Section 3 also states that any commissioner-imposed penalties
will supersede any club disciplines for the same offense (NFL, 2011). On page 184 of the
NFL CBA, there is a diagram that shows the fines for each year according to what type of
violation is being disciplined. An interesting section of Article 42 deals with NFL Drug and
Steroid Policies. Specifically this is section 6:
“No Club may impose any discipline against a player, including but not limited to
terminating the player’s Player Contract, as a result of that Player’s violation of the
Policy on Anabolic Steroids and Related Substances or the NFL Policy and Program
on Substances of Abuse, or for failing any drug test, provided, however, that the fact
that a player has violated the Policy on Anabolic Steroids and Related Substances or
the NFL Policy and Program on Substances of Abuse, or has failed a drug test will
not preclude the termination of his Player Contract if such termination is otherwise
expressly permissible under this Agreement or the player’s Player Contract” (NFL,
2011).
This section is very important to the players and clubs, as they have to follow the NFLs
policies on drugs and steroids very closely.

The media and public have varying opinions on who got the better end of the 2011
CBA. The Boston Globe was a media outlet at the time that believed the owners got the
better end of the deal, stating that the revenues received were significantly greater than
before for certain teams (Volin, 2013). Also, the rookie scale being lowered not only gave
the owners more money, but made veterans expendable because rookies were now a
cheaper option to have (Volin, 2013). On the other hand, some media outlets believe that
the players received the better end of the deal by getting more player safety implications,
no 18 game season and retirement benefits (Rosenthal, 2011).
In conclusion, the landscape of the NFL completely changed once the players were
looked at as a representation and established a collective bargaining agreement with the
owners. Several cases over the following years paved the way for equal opportunities and
proper compensation in the NFL for the players. Without a collective bargaining
agreement, there would not be set labor laws within the NFL and a disaster would have
ensued over the years. The 2011 collective bargaining agreement is a recent example that
can be used to show how terms are laid out and all of the negotiations that take place
during CBA discussions are powerful because of how many items must be agreed upon.
This CBA will set the standard until 2020, at that point the same issues will then be
discussed again, as deals like this are a revolving door and must be approached every time
they come to an end. The CBA is astronomically important to the stability of the NFL and its
relationship between the owners and the NFLPA. Not having such an agreement would
crumble the league and force it into a lockout or end it entirely.

Reference List
Breer, A. (2012, May 21). NFLPA says players have benefitted from new CBA. Retrieved
February 19, 2015, from
http://www.nfl.2com/news/story/09000d5d8293f393/article/nflpa-says-players- have-
benefitted-from-new-cba
Chronology of NFL labor history since 1968. (2011, March 3). Retrieved March 15, 2015,
from http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?page=nfl_labor_history
Deubert, C., Wong, G., & Howe, J. (2012). All Four Quarters: A Retrospective and
Analysis of the 2011 Collective Bargaining Process and Agreement in the National
Football League. UCLA Entertainment Law Review. Retrieved February 19, 2015, from
http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy- kutztown.klnpa.org/hottopics/lnacademic/
Duhaime, L. (n.d.). Collective Bargaining Agreement Legal Definition:. Retrieved March
15, 2015, from
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/C/CollectiveBargainingAgreement.aspx
Edelman, M. (2014, December 11). Why The New NFL Personal Conduct Policy Violates
Federal Labor Law. Retrieved February 20, 2015, from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcedelman/2014/12/11/why-the-new-nfl-conduct- policy-
violates-federal-labor-law/
Imbarlina, E. (2011, December 19). JURIST - Labor Law Leads to Efficient Operations in the
NFL. Retrieved February 20, 2015, from http://jurist.org/dateline/2011/12/erica- menze-
labor-law.php
NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement. (2011, July 25). Retrieved February 19, 2015, from

https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/collective-bargaining- agreement-2011-
2020.pdf
Ray Rice v. NFL Arbitration Hearing
Rosenthal, G. (2011, July 25). The CBA in a nutshell. Retrieved March 15, 2015, from
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/25/the-cba-in-a-nutshell/
Volin, B. (2013, July 21). NFL owners destroyed the players in CBA negotiations - The Boston
Globe. Retrieved March 15, 2015, from
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/07/20/nfl-owners-destroyed-players-cba-
negotiations/ia3c1ydpS16H5FhFEiviHP/story.html

SPT 290 Final Draft

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to SPT 290 Final Draft

Similar to SPT 290 Final Draft (20)

SPT 290 Final Draft