Over 60 antitrust suits were filed against the NFL between 1966 and 1991.

Section 1 of the Sherman Act states that it is illegal to enter into any contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade.  If the court cannot rule as to whether a restraint is per se illegal, it will look to see if it is unreasonable under the “rule of reason” test.  Test aside, the NFL has been able to protect itself from a majority of antitrust lawsuits based on the nonstatutory labor exemption.

The nonstatutory labor exemption protects the NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) from being in violation of antitrust laws, as long as there exists good-faith bargaining over wages, hours, and working conditions.  It recognizes that some restraints on competition will be a part of collective bargaining, but that these restraints are justified by the benefits of collective bargaining.  With no collective bargaining agreement in place and assuming that union decertification occurs, would the nonstatutory labor exemption survive?  Do the parties want to find out?

In 1989, the NFLPA filed a lawsuit and claimed that once the 1982 CBA expired and negotiations reached an impasse, the nonstatutory labor exemption ceased to exist.  If the parties do not reach an agreement today and there is not another extension for talks to continue, it could certainly be argued that the parties have reached an impasse.  Anyway, in the 1989 case, the infamous Judge Doty held that the impasse did in fact put an end to the nonstatutory labor exemption.  That holding was overturned because it was found that a collective bargaining relationship between the NFL and the NFLPA still existed.  Then the NFLPA decertified and players filed antitrust lawsuits against NFL owners.

No one wants to go down that road again.  Lawsuits cost money.  Appeals cost even more money.  And from what we know about Judge Doty, he tends to lean towards protecting the players, as evidenced by his recent ruling on the NFL’s Lockout Insurance policy and his decision in the aforementioned 1989 lawsuit.  Even if the NFL ends up proving that decertification is merely a ploy to open up the door for sham antitrust lawsuits and convinces a judge that even though the NFLPA “decertified” the entity is still in effect a union, it will take a lot of money, time, and energy to get to that point.  The NFLPA seems ready to go to battle.  Will the NFL fold its hand or fight it out in court?

NFL Labor Battle: To The Courts? from Sports Agent Blog - Sports Business, Sports Law, Sports Negotiations, NCAA Rules

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello mentioned that Doty’s ruling on Vick’s bonuses was upheld in large part because the 8th Circuit found the contract’s forfeiture language ambiguous.

The ruling allows the Philadelphia Eagles backup Quarterback to keep more than $16 million in roster bonuses from the Atlanta Falcons.  The court claimed that Vick had already earned the bonus money before he was convicted of federal dog fighting crimes and the money was NOT subject to forfeiture laws.

Vick could certainly use the additional money to help pay off creditors and start over now that he is back on the playing field.  He is set to earn  $1.6 million from the Eagles this year with a team option for the second year at $5.2 million.

Obviously the NFL was not happy about the appellate court’s decision to agree with Judge Doty’s previous ruling.  Doty has handled NFL cases including Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) matters for years.  However, after his first decision in this case, the NFL began accusing the Judge of being biased and attempted to end his oversight of its contract with the players union.

Unfortunately, after the decision that the 8th circuit handed down, it looks like the relationship between the NFL and Judge Doty will continue a bit longer.

Vick Can Keep The Falcon$ Money from Sports Agent Blog - Sports Business, Sports Law, Sports Negotiations, NCAA Rules