New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[ZigZagRam]

My bad I forgot. Again. The article was published last night btw not 10 days ago.

My mistake. That site appears to be behind as they're writing the same info that the Contra Costa Times posted on March 2 in this article.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/bre...-thinking-small-when-it-comes-oakland-stadium

 

[Stranger]

Really really happy to see the Raiders going small. That's so smart. The have a very loyal fan ase that wants to attend game, so why not create a quaint exerience that caters to them.

"It's all political and bureaucratic," Kephart says. "It has nothing to do with anything that is a negotiating point. That’s what I would tell you from a business perspective."

OMG, someone is actually being honest to the public. Rarely seen these days.

 

[RamFan503]

A visible link would be best for legality.

I don't think it's that hard to post a URL link on these boards.

Just trying to look out for a simple solution to protect the board we all love.

Appreciate that. I agree that it is proper and expected. At minimum the writer's name and where it was taken from should have been there.

My response was while laying in bed so it wasn't going to be a long one.

 

[ZigZagRam]

Friction between unions, developers could snarl Inglewood NFL stadium project
By Michael R. Blood, The Associated Press

Link: http://www.dailynews.com/sports/201...ers-could-snarl-inglewood-nfl-stadium-project

POSTED: 03/12/15, 9:12 AM PDT |

LOS ANGELES >> Friction between organized labor and the developers of a potential NFL stadium in the Los Angeles suburbs threatened Thursday to tangle up the project even before construction started.

St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke is part of a group planning to build an 80,000-seat stadium in Inglewood, near Los Angeles.

But unions are troubled because the developers have not reached agreements assuring that labor will be part of the project that would create thousands of jobs.

Los Angeles County Federation of Labor Executive Secretary Rusty Hicks said in a statement Thursday the group wants “signed, written agreements” from the developer committing to good jobs for construction and operations at the stadium.

“The developer promises Inglewood good jobs. And, the developers have told us the same thing that they told the (Inglewood) City Council: ‘Everything will be OK,’” Hicks said. “But, if there’s one thing the NFL Players Association has taught the rest of us about NFL owners, it’s that you get it in writing before the game is played.”

“We’ve got enough poverty jobs. We don’t need any more,” Hicks added.

A developers’ spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment.

The politically powerful unions have been quietly gathering petition signatures in Inglewood that could lead to a local vote on the plan, potentially delaying development of the project. That would seek to override the City Council, which previously endorsed the plan.

The tension in Inglewood is in contrast with a rival stadium proposal in nearby Carson, where the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders are planning a shared stadium if both teams fail to get new stadiums in their current hometowns.

At an event launching the Carson project last month, labor leaders praised the teams for assuring unions would get the prized work.

“We have good commitments that this thing is going to be union from top to bottom,” Ron Miller, executive secretary of the Los Angeles-Orange County Building & Construction Trades Council, said at the time.

 

[RamFan503]

Gee. I wonder why it costs a billion dollars to even think about a stadium plan.

 

[rhinobean]

It's not a done deal but the MO senate passed a bill in committee to not allow the governor to approve use of existing bonds to finance the stadium in STL without a vote of the legislature or public. Got to be voted on by full senate first! Knew this was going to happen as the senate is majority republican and Nixon's a democrat.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

Friction between unions, developers could snarl Inglewood NFL stadium project
By Michael R. Blood, The Associated Press

Link: http://www.dailynews.com/sports/201...ers-could-snarl-inglewood-nfl-stadium-project

POSTED: 03/12/15, 9:12 AM PDT |

LOS ANGELES >> Friction between organized labor and the developers of a potential NFL stadium in the Los Angeles suburbs threatened Thursday to tangle up the project even before construction started.

St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke is part of a group planning to build an 80,000-seat stadium in Inglewood, near Los Angeles.

But unions are troubled because the developers have not reached agreements assuring that labor will be part of the project that would create thousands of jobs.

Los Angeles County Federation of Labor Executive Secretary Rusty Hicks said in a statement Thursday the group wants “signed, written agreements” from the developer committing to good jobs for construction and operations at the stadium.

“The developer promises Inglewood good jobs. And, the developers have told us the same thing that they told the (Inglewood) City Council: ‘Everything will be OK,’” Hicks said. “But, if there’s one thing the NFL Players Association has taught the rest of us about NFL owners, it’s that you get it in writing before the game is played.”

“We’ve got enough poverty jobs. We don’t need any more,” Hicks added.

A developers’ spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment.

The politically powerful unions have been quietly gathering petition signatures in Inglewood that could lead to a local vote on the plan, potentially delaying development of the project. That would seek to override the City Council, which previously endorsed the plan.

The tension in Inglewood is in contrast with a rival stadium proposal in nearby Carson, where the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders are planning a shared stadium if both teams fail to get new stadiums in their current hometowns.

At an event launching the Carson project last month, labor leaders praised the teams for assuring unions would get the prized work.

“We have good commitments that this thing is going to be union from top to bottom,” Ron Miller, executive secretary of the Los Angeles-Orange County Building & Construction Trades Council, said at the time.

The roller coaster keeps on going.

 

[ZigZagRam]

It's not a done deal but the MO senate passed a bill in committee to not allow the governor to approve use of existing bonds to finance the stadium in STL without a vote of the legislature or public. Got to be voted on by full senate first! Knew this was going to happen as the senate is majority republican and Nixon's a democrat.

It'd have to be approved by the Senate, then approved by the House, then approved by Nixon, or else they'd need a 2/3 majority to override Nixon's veto.

 

[den-the-coach]

The roller coaster keeps on going.

The only snag in Inglewood so far, I guess Mayor Butts will have to work some more of his magic.

 

[bluecoconuts]

The only snag in Inglewood so far, I guess Mayor Butts will have to work some more of his magic.

Sounds like they just gotta get it in writing the unions get the job? Wouldn't imagine it'll be hard for them to do

 

[ZigZagRam]

Sounds like they just gotta get it in writing the unions get the job? Wouldn't imagine it'll be hard for them to do

Unless there was a good reason for them trying to avoid that in the first place.

Butts is saying it would've prevented local job creation.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Unless there was a good reason for them trying to avoid that in the first place.

Butts is saying it would've prevented local job creation.

So Butts wants local workers, and outside unions want the jobs instead? How can they stop the project then? I'd imagine you need the Inglewood voters to block the project.

I'm not seeing where Butts said he didn't want the unions getting the jobs though, do you have a link?

 

[Irish]

It'd have to be approved by the Senate, then approved by the House, then approved by Nixon, or else they'd need a 2/3 majority to override Nixon's veto.

Right, and Nixon could hold off on the Veto until right after the General Assembly Session ends, wait several months, have it go back to debate and needed a majority to override the veto, at which point shovels will already have been in the ground, land acquired, and the stadium building process would be well underway.

 

[LesBaker]

Friction between unions, developers could snarl Inglewood NFL stadium project
By Michael R. Blood, The Associated Press

Link: http://www.dailynews.com/sports/201...ers-could-snarl-inglewood-nfl-stadium-project

POSTED: 03/12/15, 9:12 AM PDT |

LOS ANGELES >> Friction between organized labor and the developers of a potential NFL stadium in the Los Angeles suburbs threatened Thursday to tangle up the project even before construction started.

St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke is part of a group planning to build an 80,000-seat stadium in Inglewood, near Los Angeles.

But unions are troubled because the developers have not reached agreements assuring that labor will be part of the project that would create thousands of jobs.

Los Angeles County Federation of Labor Executive Secretary Rusty Hicks said in a statement Thursday the group wants “signed, written agreements” from the developer committing to good jobs for construction and operations at the stadium.

“The developer promises Inglewood good jobs. And, the developers have told us the same thing that they told the (Inglewood) City Council: ‘Everything will be OK,’” Hicks said. “But, if there’s one thing the NFL Players Association has taught the rest of us about NFL owners, it’s that you get it in writing before the game is played.”

“We’ve got enough poverty jobs. We don’t need any more,” Hicks added.

A developers’ spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment.

The politically powerful unions have been quietly gathering petition signatures in Inglewood that could lead to a local vote on the plan, potentially delaying development of the project. That would seek to override the City Council, which previously endorsed the plan.

The tension in Inglewood is in contrast with a rival stadium proposal in nearby Carson, where the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders are planning a shared stadium if both teams fail to get new stadiums in their current hometowns.

At an event launching the Carson project last month, labor leaders praised the teams for assuring unions would get the prized work.

“We have good commitments that this thing is going to be union from top to bottom,” Ron Miller, executive secretary of the Los Angeles-Orange County Building & Construction Trades Council, said at the time.

Wow talk about amazing arrogance. This by itself would make me say "no thanks, go work on something else". As if they have some right to these jobs, this work that may happen, most of them aren't even from the Inglewood area I bet.

Unions, always part of the problem never part of the solution. Who the fuck does this dolt think he is.

 

[RamFan503]

Unless there was a good reason for them trying to avoid that in the first place.

Butts is saying it would've prevented local job creation.

It would have. The locals would have had to be members of the specific unions and then they would decide who they sent more so than the developer or city. The Inglewood project has set goals for local hiring and the union would potentially get in the way of that. And this is not a diss on the union workers. It is not up to them.

I had to be a member of a union in CA in order to work certain highway jobs for a landscape company. The union would tell us which employees could do what based on their stature in the union. Mind you, this same union made sure we all got paid at least the minimum wage plus their hourly cut. So most of us made minimum wage unless we worked prevailing wage jobs. And if you stepped outside of your duties on a prevailing wage job, you were pulled and placed at the bottom of the cue.

True story:

I was working on a job in San Louis Obispo on Hwy 1. We were landscaping the median near Cal Poly. We had to have a boring crew come in and bore under the hwy and install sleeves so we could get our pipes and wires to the median. My job was to keep written track of the progress made by the boring crew, note the weather conditions, and escort pedestrians (about 5 per day) by the front of the pit nearest the sidewalk. Most boring job I've ever had. But mind you, this was in the mid 80's and I was making $5 an hour normally but with this job I was making $14.92 per hour plus $7 per hour untaxed benefit package (our company didn't offer benefits). Anything over 8 hours a day I got paid time and a half, anything over 40 hours per week I got time and a half, and it didn't matter if those hours were already being paid at time and a half for working over 8 hours. I was making bank as the boring crew would generally do 12 hour days. And still it pissed me off because it was total bullshit that I even needed to be there and that I couldn't do anything else.

Well one day, one of the guys in the pit was feeling around trying to get his hand on a shovel. I had the audacity to pick up the shovel and hand it to him right as the Cal Trans rep and union field rep showed up with my boss. My boss had to watch while the other two took me to task for stepping away from my responsibilities. Mind you, I could have taken a step backward and tripped on this shovel.

My boss had to replace me for the rest of the day so that I would learn my lesson. My boss had no choice but he put me back on that job the next day. So freaking ridiculous.

Other times, because I was listed as a laborer, I was not allowed to operate equipment as simple as a trencher that I operated every day on non-prevailing wage jobs. If the job was fairly remote, I would just do it anyway.

 

[RamFan503]

I'm not seeing where Butts said he didn't want the unions getting the jobs though, do you have a link?

Can't speak for ZigZag but I don't think that's what he's saying Butts said. If I'm reading it right, Butts is only saying that the unions could get in the way of the local hiring requirements/goals.

 

[dieterbrock]

I haven't paid much attention to this in a week or so. Last I checked it looked like St Louis was getting their stadium and San Diego/Oakland were moving to LA. Is that still the vibe?

 

[bluecoconuts]

I haven't paid much attention to this in a week or so. Last I checked it looked like St Louis was getting their stadium and San Diego/Oakland were moving to LA. Is that still the vibe?

I'd say chances haven't changed any in months, there's still issues that every site needs to fix before moving forward.

 

[RamFan503]

I haven't paid much attention to this in a week or so. Last I checked it looked like St Louis was getting their stadium and San Diego/Oakland were moving to LA. Is that still the vibe?

Not much has actually changed. We still have 3 teams, 4 cities, and 3 proposed stadiums.

 

[blue4]

It would have. The locals would have had to be members of the specific unions and then they would decide who they sent more so than the developer or city. The Inglewood project has set goals for local hiring and the union would potentially get in the way of that. And this is not a diss on the union workers. It is not up to them.

I had to be a member of a union in CA in order to work certain highway jobs for a landscape company. The union would tell us which employees could do what based on their stature in the union. Mind you, this same union made sure we all got paid at least the minimum wage plus their hourly cut. So most of us made minimum wage unless we worked prevailing wage jobs. And if you stepped outside of your duties on a prevailing wage job, you were pulled and placed at the bottom of the cue.

True story:

I was working on a job in San Louis Obispo on Hwy 1. We were landscaping the median near Cal Poly. We had to have a boring crew come in and bore under the hwy and install sleeves so we could get our pipes and wires to the median. My job was to keep written track of the progress made by the boring crew, note the weather conditions, and escort pedestrians (about 5 per day) by the front of the pit nearest the sidewalk. Most boring job I've ever had. But mind you, this was in the mid 80's and I was making $5 an hour normally but with this job I was making $14.92 per hour plus $7 per hour untaxed benefit package (our company didn't offer benefits). Anything over 8 hours a day I got paid time and a half, anything over 40 hours per week I got time and a half, and it didn't matter if those hours were already being paid at time and a half for working over 8 hours. I was making bank as the boring crew would generally do 12 hour days. And still it pissed me off because it was total bullcrap that I even needed to be there and that I couldn't do anything else.

Well one day, one of the guys in the pit was feeling around trying to get his hand on a shovel. I had the audacity to pick up the shovel and hand it to him right as the Cal Trans rep and union field rep showed up with my boss. My boss had to watch while the other two took me to task for stepping away from my responsibilities. Mind you, I could have taken a step backward and tripped on this shovel.

My boss had to replace me for the rest of the day so that I would learn my lesson. My boss had no choice but he put me back on that job the next day. So freaking ridiculous.

Other times, because I was listed as a laborer, I was not allowed to operate equipment as simple as a trencher that I operated every day on non-prevailing wage jobs. If the job was fairly remote, I would just do it anyway.

I have a 1000 stories of how unions have benefited my family on both sides dating back almost 70 years to little "startup" teamster type unions. Can we not do the anti/pro union stuff outside the off topic section? I'd hate to get political and ugly on a Rams board.

Wow talk about amazing arrogance. This by itself would make me say "no thanks, go work on something else". As if they have some right to these jobs, this work that may happen, most of them aren't even from the Inglewood area I bet.

Unions, always part of the problem never part of the solution. Who the freak does this dolt think he is.