I caught the end of the Seattle - Green Bay game tonight and
after listening to all of the post game discussions I felt compelled to write
something about the situation with the officials.
First off - yes, off course the refs blew the game tonight
and cost Green Bay the win. Even the
most diehard Seahawks fan would have a hard time claiming they deserved to win
with a straight face. It wasn't just the
last call either. The replacement officials
blew a series of calls down the stretch, all in Seattle's favor. They were awful tonight, but it shouldn't be
a huge surprise that guys who officiate D-III college football are struggling a
little with the rules and speed of the NFL.
It's not the replacement ref's fault - they're doing the best they can.
What I want to talk about is WHY we have replacement refs at
all. The paraphrased comment from almost
every media member after the game was "If this doesn't get the NFL to
bring back the regular refs I don't know what will". What this tells you is that the media (even
Steve Young with his law degree from BYU), much like 99% of the fans, either have
no idea what they're talking about or are being intellectually dishonest when
it comes to this issue. Allow me to
educate:
·
The first thing that confuses people is the term
"lock-out". People hear that
the refs are "locked-out" by the league which paints the picture that
the NFL isn't letting them come to work.
Lock-out is simply legal semantics.
The refs are on strike, but because the NFL is based in New York - a
"forced unionization" state - they cannot legally allow the regular
refs, who are unionized, to return to work without a collective bargaining
agreement signed. If the NFL were based
in a right-to-work state such as South Carolina for example, they wouldn’t have
to be "locked-out" and would simply be on strike because there would
be no state legal issue with allowing individual refs to "cross the picket
line" so to speak and return to work.
·
So what is the NFL Referee Union striking
about? Well, first of all they want more
money. No surprise there - collective
bargaining units always want more money.
Actually, this isn't really a sticking point as the NFL has agreed to a
substantial raise for officials. What is
a sticking point, however, is the NFL refusing to grant pensions for "part-time"
officials. They still want to continue
the pensions for all full-time officials but not for the part-timers (by the
way, the NFL wants all the officials to be full time). They also want to add at least one more crew,
and possibly up to 21 new officials. The
union is dead set against this. Now why
would a union EVER be opposed to ADDING members? Simple - if there are more officials, it
allows the NFL to "bench" some crews from week to week and to have
replacement refs trained to replace older officials who might retire. Another issue that has the union digging
their heels in is that the NFL wants to evaluate officials performance. Currently, the officials self-evaluate. In other words, the refs don't want their
boss to be able to evaluate them based on performance and decide who works from
week to week based on those performance evaluations.
Don't blame the NFL for not having the regular refs - blame
the regular refs.