Issues[edit]
The officials' union said that all of its demands amounted to a $3.2 million annual cost to the NFL, roughly four hundredths of a percent of the $9 billion in revenue generated by the league.[18]
Retirement plan[edit]
The main issue behind the dispute was the retirement plan. Under the previous contract, NFL referees received a defined benefit plan, where retired workers would be guaranteed a fixed amount of income based on the length of their employment. The league wanted to switch to a defined contribution 401(k) plan, under which benefits would depend on the performance of the plan's investments, and would not be guaranteed.[19]
The referees opposed this change, calling the 401(k) plan "inferior" because it would have reduced the league's funding obligation by 60%, while at the same time shifting additional investment risk to the employees. The referees said they would be willing to accept the change, as long as it only applied to new hires. The NFL initially rejected this stipulation, insisting that all referees switch to the new plan, but conceded to allowing current officials to retain their defined benefit plans until 2016.[13][19]
Salaries[edit]
Under the previous labor agreement, referees were paid from a shared pool of $18 million per year, which works out to an average of about $149,000 per employee for each of the 121 referees (with the exact amount higher or lower depending on certain factors). The league claimed it was offering to increase average salaries from $149,000 to $189,000 by 2018, with average annual increases of between five and 11 percent.[20] The referees disputed that claim, saying that the league's proposal actually only increases salaries by 2.82% per year.[21]
Additional crews[edit]
The NFL currently employs 17 officiating "crews"-one for each of the 16 games played, plus one extra. The league wanted to hire three additional crews, bringing the total to 20 crews. The league claimed this would improve the quality of officiating, since they would have a larger pool of qualified officials to choose from, rewarding the best performing crews, and giving them more flexibility to "sideline" or "bench" poor performing ones. The union indicated that they believed the NFL was using the issue to distract from the core issues in the negotiations, due to the fact that the proposition was introduced so late in the negotiating process,[22] and because a provision for adding officials already existed in the previous CBA.[23] However, referees felt that making it easier to "bench" them undermined their job security, and since officials are paid based on the number of games worked, increasing the number of officials would invariably reduce the number of games worked per official, thereby reducing each official's average pay for a full season.[24]
Full-time officials[edit]
The current group of officials are classified as part-time workers, with 90% of NFL referees holding other full-time jobs. The league wanted seven referees to work as full-time employees- one for each officiating position (referee, umpire, head linesman, etc.). The full-time officials would work with the league year-round on issues like safety, rule interpretations, training and scouting. The union was not opposed to this idea per se, but wanted assurances that full-time officials would be fairly compensated.[6][21][25]