|
Home>News Center>Sports | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Lawyers argue over US soccer no-strike clause
With the U.S. Soccer Federation still threatening to use a replacement team of minor leaguers in next month's World Cup qualifier, lawyers for players and management argued over the length of a no-strike clause when they met with a federal mediator for the first time.
The players' association, which says it is being locked out, offered a five-month no-strike pledge to end the dispute, the union said after Thursday's bargaining session in Chicago.
Management and the union have been without a contract for more than two years and are fighting over money and other issues.
The USSF said it would use the regular national-team players for the Feb. 9 game at Trinidad and Tobago if the union gave a no-strike pledge through the end of qualifying in November.
Players then said they would agree to a no-strike clause through qualifying only if the USSF paid them at the rate of management's last proposal, not at the rate of the contract that expired in December 2002. The federation, which is offering retroactive increases once a new contract takes effect, said the new rate would be used now only if the no-strike agreement extended until May 31, 2006, nine days before the scheduled start of the World Cup in Germany.
In addition, the union proposed that the mediator choose compromise numbers between the sides' proposals.
"At the conclusion of the session, the players' association indicated it would consult with its membership and get back to us," USSF spokesman Jim Moorhouse said. "We are committed to creating an environment of certainty at our camps and games, and that is why the no-strike pledge is so important."
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
