By Matt SlocumESPN Staff – SEP 17, 2019The union has been at the forefront of the push for antitrust charges against the National Football League (NFL) and its teams.
But it appears to be playing second fiddle to the league in the antitrust lawsuit that was filed last year.
The NFLPA filed suit in October against the NFL and its owners for allegedly conspiring to deprive the players of a collective bargaining agreement.
The league argued the players had not agreed to the merger when they signed it.
The suit also alleges that the NFLPA violated antitrust laws by preventing the NFL from exercising the right to negotiate the terms of the merger.
It has not yet filed any antitrust charges.
In a statement issued by the NFL, the union said it would fight to maintain antitrust protections for the league and its players.
“The union is pleased that the court has agreed with our position that the merger did not comply with antitrust laws and the courts will now allow the case to proceed,” the statement said.
The union also criticized the NFL for trying to interfere in the case.
“In a case that was originally brought by the players in 2015, the league was trying to block the merger from taking place and to prevent any antitrust enforcement action,” the union’s statement said, adding that it would continue to fight against the league’s efforts to impede the lawsuit.
The league filed its antitrust complaint in February.
The lawsuit is now before a federal judge in Philadelphia.
The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Philadelphia, where a jury trial is set to begin.
It will be heard by Judge Robert L. Shrum.
In its complaint, the NFL argued that the Philadelphia team had agreed to merge with the Philadelphia Eagles and that the Eagles had failed to exercise their right to bargain with the NFL in the merger agreement.
“This merger agreement did not give the Eagles a right to be represented by an independent labor organization as they did in the Philadelphia SuperSonics case,” the NFL said in its complaint.
“The Eagles did not bargain collectively for the benefit of the league or its players, who, because of the NFL merger, were denied an opportunity to negotiate.”
The NFL also said that the deal did not include any provisions designed to protect players’ interests and would be detrimental to the NFL.
“As a result, players in the Eagles-Eagles merger would have had no ability to exercise any labor rights,” the league said in the complaint.
“It would be unreasonable to expect the players to represent themselves as bargaining agents when they were no longer represented by their existing union.”
The case is not likely to reach a verdict.
It is expected to last for about six months.