could be sufficiently distant in time and in circumstances from the collective-bargaining process that a rule permitting antitrust intervention would not significantly interfere with that process.” Id. at 250, 116 S.Ct. 2116. As one example of such a sufficiently distant event, the Court cited a “collapse of the collective-bargaining relationship, as evidenced by decertification of the union.” Id.) Brown, 50 F.3d at 1057 (“If employees wish to seek the protections of the Sherman Act, they may forego unionization or even decertify their unions.”); see also NBA v. Williams, 857 F.Supp. 1069, 1078 (S.D.N.Y.1994) (pre dieting the players can avoid the labor injunction if they disclaim the union as their collective bargaining agent); Powell v. NFL, 764 F.Supp. 1351, 1356-57 (D.Minn.1991) (<HOLDING>). When the union no longer represents
holding that union members had standing to bring rico claims for reduced compensation under collective bargaining agreement holding that the ongoing collective bargaining relationship ends and the nonstatutory labor exemption no longer applies when the players vote to repudiate the union holding that an employee may sue for breach of a collective bargaining agreement without the union holding that the union owes its representatives a duty to enforce the terms of the negotiated collective bargaining agreement holding that union members suit based on contract that was independent of a collective bargaining agreement was not preempted and not removable