In a September 14, 2011 email, Nolan Harrison III explained why the NFLPA representatives did not attend the meeting last Thursday by saying “As many of you know, Cornelius Bennett, Tom DePaso and myself were going to attend a meeting tomorrow in New York with Goodell to speak about the Legacy Benefit. Due to the Eller II law suit being filed against the NFLPA today, council has advised us not to attend as one of the named plaintiffs will be in attendance. This is unfortunate timing as we are all wanting to complete the bargaining session with the NFL so that we can implement the Legacy benefit which has been delayed for the past four weeks. At the conclusion of the meeting the NFLPA intends to request that the NFL responds with a counter proposal and timeline so that we can get this benefit into your hands as soon as possible.”
The “named” plantiff that Mr. Harrison was referring to was Carl Eller. As you know, Carl and many other Hall of Fame players have filed a class action lawsuit against the NFLPA. You can read the Class Action Court Document at the bottom of this article.
The NFLPA was not only a “no show” for the meeting, but on top of that they had the audacity to blame the NFL for delaying the final passage of the Legacy Fund benefit. Indirectly, they are also blaming Carl Eller and the other Hall of Famers because they had the nerve to file a lawsuit against them.
Heaven forbid the NFLPA should sit across the table from someone that is suing them!
On the other hand, the NFL had no problem sitting down with Tom Brady, Drew Brees and Mike Vrabel when those players were actively suing them – and making decisions on how retired player benefits should be funded.
If the NFLPA had bothered to ask, I think the League negotiators would have met with them separately, either before or after the meeting they had with Bruce Laird, Carl Eller, Willie Lanier, George Martin and Ron Mix. By doing so, they could have reduced the length of time it would have taken to resolve this issue.
Apparently, the NFLPA is perfectly content with the proposal they submitted to the NFL, even though Jim McFarland, one of the key “elected” representatives for NFLPA former player members has voiced several objections to the way the NFLPA is proposing to distribute the funding.
It is interesting to note that Jim McFarland was not among the NFLPA reps that were listed to meet with the NFL. I guess the NFLPA didn’t want the potential embarrassment of having their own former player rep sitting at the table disagreeing with their proposal.
Although I don’t always see eye-to-eye with Jim, I will always have great admiration for his decision to speak out about the Legacy Fund and provide additional recommendations on how it should be allocated.
The reason Commissioner Goodell called for a meeting with former players is simple – he wanted to get as much input from them as he possibly could.
It is important for all retired players to remember this one very important fact: The NFLPA does not have the “exclusive” right to bargain on behalf of retired players. The Commissioner knows full well that the NFLPA does not represent all retired players, so he reached out to some prominent retired player advocates to get some additional advice and recommendations on the distribution of the Legacy benefit.
I know there are guys out there that will question why the NFL Commissioner chose the former players that he did, but I for one am satisfied that he had the right people at the table. Whether the NFLPA or NFL choose to listen to the advice of those former players is another story.
So now that the NFLPA has acted like a spoiled child and has taken their ball home with them, when will they come back out and play?
If they haven’t already done so, the NFL and the NFLPA need to schedule a meeting today and get the Legacy benefit issue ironed out. If the NFLPA expects the NFL to send them a counter proposal, they may be waiting until hell freezes over. This is a negotiating process and I doubt the League is going to put out one specific counter proposal. The NFL has several proposals they would like to discuss with the Union, but unless the NFLPA comes to the table, this thing could drag on for quite some time.
After they come to an agreement, the NFLPA can sit back and slap themselves on the back for another successful “shell game” where they left retired players wondering where the ball went.
The fact is, the ball was never under the shell to begin with……it was in their pocket (and the active player pockets) from the start of the game.
If Carl Eller and the Hall of Fame players are successful in their litigation on behalf of retired players, we just might get a chance to see where the ball went during the “discovery phase” of the trial.
Hopefully, the Carl Eller lawsuit can expose some of the inequities in the distribution of retired player benefits, along with the inherent conflict of interest that was taking place when the union was decertified (but still acting like a union) and the active players were – wink wink – helping us out.
Just for the record, here is what Carl Eller and the former players involved in the Eller I litigation team proposed for retired player benefits via the Pension Plan:
Pension Fund Settlement Proposal
I. Pension
A. Benefit Increase
We propose the following Benefit Credit enhancements under The Bert Bell/Pete Roselle NFL Player Retirement Plan (the “Retirement Plan”):
Credited Season Current Benefit Credit Proposed Benefit Credit*
Before 1982 $250 $500
1982 through 1992 $255 $505
1993 and 1994 $265 $515
1995 and 1996 $315 $565
1997 $365 $615
1998 and later $470 $650
* Proposed Benefit Credit increases will be effective July 1, 2011 for all Retirement Plan participants, whether or not the participant has commenced distribution of his pension benefit. The Proposed Benefit Credit will be subject to the same adjustments for retirement before or after Normal Retirement Date and for optional forms of payment that are in the current Retirement Plan.
Proposed Cost:
At the June 6, 2011 meeting the NFL reps said Aon Hewitt estimated the liability attributable to this proposal to be approximately $1.3 billion. Based on the 2010 valuation interest rate of 7.25% and a 15 year amortization schedule, this translates into annual funding payments of approximately $150 million.
B. Vesting Enhancements:
We propose the following vesting enhancements under the Retirement Plan:
Current vesting is determined as follows (with certain disability and other exceptions):
(a) five Credited Seasons (for pre-1974 players)
(b) four Credited Seasons (for players who play after 1973)
(c) three Credited Seasons (for players who play after 1992)
Proposed new vesting schedule:
Aon Hewitt has not yet provided us the data to fully price out these proposals. However, at the aforementioned June 6th meeting, the NFL reps said there were 378 former players who had three Credited Seasons but not four Credited Seasons when vesting was reduced to four credited seasons. The NFL reps said the liability attributable to vesting these former players was $49.9 million. Based on the 2010 valuation interest rate of 7.25% and a 15 year amortization schedule, this translates into annual funding payments of approximately $5.5 million.
It appears that Eller’s pension plan changes is just with the general plan, and is not addressing the Leacy Fund. If indeed those changes were adapted retired players would be quite happy. It will be interesting to see if the meeting with the commissioner and retired has any impact.
jeff-
what about all of us who played less than the vesting periods that still have health related complications and lifestyle limitations because of what we gave prior to the vesting periods?
is the GLA available for ALL players or just those who are active paying NFL Alumni members?
i live in CO and we have no active chapter. how do i go about taking this over or getting something started again in the Rocky Mountains states?
Scott:
The GLA is available for ALL retired players. You don’t have to be an active member of the NFL Alumni.
There is a Rocky Mountain Chapter and the President is Tony Davis. You can call him at (970) 978-7451 or email at tdavis1453@yahoo.com
If you have other questions, you should contact the NFL Alumni office and ask for Richard Dandrea, Director of Chapter Development at (973) 241-4221
Jeff Nixon
Jeff- Did you really think the NFLPA would lower themselves and actually come down from their ivory tower on 20th Street NW to interact with the aforementioned groups who represent the welfare and concerns of retired players? I didn’t think so. It’s puzzling that DeMaurice Smith managed to find time last week to address the NBA’s player union but couldn’t squeeze into his busy schedule a sit down with Roger Goodell and the reps from the various retired player organizations. I honestly feel Commissioner Goodell is trying to work out a fair and equitable allocation of funds agreed upon in the CBA for pre 93′ retirees, but is being stonewalled by our self righteous, pompous NFLPA who regard us as nothing more than an irritating thorn in their side. Unfortunately, the longer this discussion drags on,more and more deserving pre 93′ retirees like Lee Roy Selmon, Don Chandler, Pete Pihos and Sam DeLucca, who all passed away within the last 2 weeks, will never realize the benefits they richly deserve as a result of the CBA.
Jeff –
When are you guys going to stop shiling for the NFL owners who never wanted to give any player an increased pension benifit. Who negotiated the $620 Million, you, Carl Eller, George Martin?
Aren’t you just a little embarrased?
David
Dave:
I’m embarrassed for you………..and the fact that you can’t bring yourself to admit that the NFLPA has once again dissappointed former players and left them with no choice but to to take them to court. The NFLPA lost the last lawsuit retired players filed against them……and they will lose this one too. There are 28 Hall of Fame players that are plaintiff’s in this lawsuit….. but there are thousands of former players that stand firmly behind them.
It’s too bad you are not one of them.
If you would take just one minute to remove your lips from DeMaurice Smith’s buttocks and read the Class Action complaint, you just might get a glimpse of what has been happening to former players and why the greatest players in the history of the NFL took this legal step against the Union. When the Court certifies this as a Class Action lawsuit, make sure you alert them that you do not want to be a part of the lawsuit.
Jeff, It seems to me that every time we turn around the NFLPA has another reason to avoid any decision on retired player benefits. I guess they are hoping that there won’t be any of us per 1993 players to worry about by the time they meet again. The one thing I can tell you is that I will save that $100.00 NFLPA membership dues for next year and add it to my $168.25 pension I get so I can look forward to my $176.58 a month pension.
I LIKE THIS BETTER SINCE THE PLAYERS OF LONG AGO THAT DIDNT MAKE MUCH THEY NEED IT MOST Credited Season Current Benefit Credit Proposed Benefit Credit*
Before 1982 $250 $650
1982 through 1992 $255 $615
1993 and 1994 $265 $565
1995 and 1996 $315 $515
1997 $365 $505
1998 and later $470 $500
BUT I DONT THINK THEY WILL DO WHAT IS RIGHT !!!!! WHY SHOULDN’T EVERYONE GET THE SAME, DOES IT MATTER WHAT YEAR YOU PLAYED DO YOU THINK 98 AND LATER PLAYERS PLAYED HARDER , IF YOU DO I WILL SEND YOU SOME FILM CLIPS THAT WILL OPEN YOUR EYES , DAD ( JOE SUTTON )HAD SURGERY THIS WEEK HE’S 87 I HOPE HE IS STILL ARROUND TO SEE SOMETHING HAPPEN
Jeff- Regarding the Meggyesy comment, you have to realize Dave was a hard line union zealot back in the late 60′s and 70′s and fought the good fight for us when dictatorial owners would cut player reps for their involvement in CBA negotiation activity with the NFL Management Council. Dave also was the head of the NFLPA’s west coast office when it was in existence in the 80′s.
Maybe Dave can explain why the NFLPA screwed retired players out of royalties in the EA/Madden affair. An unfortunate recurring story about unions in the US is that their devoted members think unions can do no wrong, and blindly support anything the unions do. Open your eyes, Dave: read the quotes from Gene Upshaw, look at the benefits he was paid from union funds, listen to the pleas of wives of the broken and demented, and the children of the departed. DO THE RIGHT THING.
Hey Meggyesy,
I was involved with the HISTORIC LAWSUIT as the Class Rep because of people like you who were pawns for Upshaw, and his Polices to give the retired guys the least amount of BENIFITS as possible. The DISCOVERY proved that the NFLPA had back room dealings with EA to Scramble US in the Vintage films to keep from paying US. The GLA agreements had wording indicating that WE should have paid, and WE didn`t. You didn`t speak about this INJUSTICE implemented against US ! WHY ? The Jury decided that WE should have been paid, and awarded US 28.1 MILLION. It is a SHAME that WE have to file Lawsuits against the NFLPA to get what WE deserve. WE will WIN the Pending Lawsuit because WE have the EVIDENCE to prove that the NFLPA didn`t represent US
to get the best deal possible. If the proposal sent to the Owners was FAIR, the NFLPA wouldn`t have to wait for a counter one. The low ball numbers for US is the problem, and why J McFarland dis-agreed with it. You agree with the proposal because, you will receive a raise for sitting in your EMPTY office doing nothing but supporting the Upshaw/ SMITH policies . [ DELAY – DENY – & HOPE WE DIE “
Thank you for remembering!
@ Herb Adderley , WOW you sound like my dad (joe sutton) he has been saying this to me for years , i guess it might be because both played for phila N.E. HIGH school ☺? I agree with you 100%, my fingers are crossed for the older players, thats when it was real football not tv driven millionairs , Herb this link is a film i made of dad it has some n.e. high pics in it http://animoto.com/play/oPaiqOF8ZSLU13bWteb6YA enjoy and GOOD LUCK WITH PENSION CRAP jack sutton
I agree with you Jack those proprosed increases for b acredited seasons should be reveresed. Some players now adays only play on certain downs. And with all the new rule changes, the game has become less of hazard to a player’s physical well being.
It makes sense to increase it to $650 a credited year for the pre-82 guys, and graduate it down like Sutton said. Since the guys after that got the much bigger money that came from the big TV contract in the early 80′s. What do you think?