View Single Post
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Wed Aug 08, 2012, 12:09pm
Eastshire Eastshire is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
While there is a small difference between a strike and a lockout here, the idea that you're not taking "their job" is false. By working for someone who is locking out people that you supposedly align with and aspire to be, you facilitate that company being able to continue operations while they prevent your ally from working. If NO ONE would work, the company could not continue to make money while preventing the locked out individuals from working.

I think it says volumes regarding the solidarity of GOOD officials that the NFL was unable to persuade ANY D1 officials to work during this lockout. The fact that they had to go all the way to D3 / High School officials means MOST profession-respecting officials are not scabbing.
The jobs don't belong to the referees. They belong to the NFL. The referee's own their labor. What we have is a disagreement over the value of that labor.

The NFLRA think their labor is significantly better than the alternative and so they've set a high price. The NFL doesn't agree and is willing to try the alternative. The new referees will turn out to be better, as good, or worse than the old referees. (I think we'll all agree on worse.) When that happens, the NFL will decide if they can live with the new referees' performance (The fans won't let them.)

Ultimately, the new referees are doing the old referees a favor as the NFLRA is going to be in the position of power when it becomes clear just how much better they are the the new guys.
Reply With Quote