Funny you mention that, because all I'm reading is a bunch of spin by the pro-union media types. You see, the NFLRA hasn't been willing to compromise. All they want to do is demand... and if it costs them their jobs, TOO BAD.
Once again, you are misrepresenting the NFLRA's positions.
From Peter King ("pro-union media type"):
"One of the reasons there's such a stalemate between the NFL and the regular officials is the pension. Many of you have asked what that means. According to attorney Mike Arnold, who represents the officials, the NFL contributed $5.3 million to the officials' pension system in 2011, and planned to reduce that number to $2 million in 2012 under the current league bargaining proposal.
Under those numbers, the NFL contributed $44,167 per man to the 120 officials' pensions in 2011, and would contribute $16,667 per man in 2012. That's a difference of $27,500 per man.
"When we were hired,'' said referee Scott Green, a member of the officials' negotiating team, "we were told, 'Here's what the compensation is, and here's what the pension is.' We don't think it's fair to have such a major give-back without being able to negotiate that at all.''
That's the biggest under-the-radar reason we're entering day 16 of no substantive talks between the officials and the league."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/09/16/week-2/3.html
It's clear to us that your anti-union bias is behind your (untenable, imo) position, and you will defend the NFL's decision no matter how bad it becomes for players, coaches and fans. Either that or you are not in full possession of your faculties.