NFL, players seek return of talks
WASHINGTON -- A day after the judge handling the NFL lockout lawsuit urged the sides to go "back to the table," the players and owners expressed a willingness to do so. The hitch: Each side offered to meet for talks in a setting the other finds unpalatable.
A lawyer representing Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and other players suing the NFL wrote U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson on Thursday to say they're willing to engage in mediation overseen by her federal court in St. Paul, Minn. And NFL executive vice president Jeffrey Pash sent a letter to another lawyer representing players, James Quinn, with a copy going to Nelson, proposing to resume talks -- in the Washington office of federal mediator George Cohen.
Since filing suit March 11, the players repeatedly have said they only are interested in meeting with the league to discuss settling the litigation. And since the lockout began at midnight that night, the NFL repeatedly has said it only is interested in returning to mediated bargaining.
So, yesterday's letters don't represent meaningful progress.
"We are prepared to resume discussions as promptly as possible and to have significant ownership involvement in those discussions. Our thought would be to resume discussions under the auspices of George Cohen and his colleagues at the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service," wrote Pash, the league's lead labor negotiator. "After spending the better part of three weeks with us, they know the issues, they know the parties and I think we all agree that they were effective at getting both sides to look openly at each other's positions and try to find solutions."
Cohen mediated 16 days of negotiations in February and March that failed to result in a new collective bargaining agreement, and the old one expired. The union dissolved, saying it no longer represented players in bargaining under labor law, which allowed them to sue the league under antitrust law. Owners locked out the players, creating the NFL's first work stoppage since 1987.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Ex-player’s book details Steeler havens across country
- Steelers’ Taylor ‘hurt’ by pay cut
- Kovacevic: Steelers’ offensive identity, anyone?