There are plenty of legitimate ways to differ income, especially in cooperation with your employer. Work 4 years to take 1 off - all 5 yrs paid at 80% programs, etc.
I don't see how it would be too different than strike pay. Except the members actually get their money back if not required for an emergency (unlike the thousands of dollars I've shipped off to AUPE over the years despite working in jobs that make no sense to even be in a union, but I digress).
Does the NHLPA do any kind of strike pay already? No mention in this old
article. It raises another interesting question around injuries come next lockout - will 'have' teams be extra careful to assess their players' health leading into a lockout (ie. perhaps a chinook headache turns into a concussion symptom, one of the many injuries a player probably shouldn't have been playing through in the playoffs is aggravated in the last game, an allergy to not having to wear hockey equipment lands you LTIR, etc.)? A pending UFA (1 year out) could continue to receive pay in exchange for lower AAV on their next contract.
Not too many extension situations yet, but Dougie Hamilton would be one (Landeskog, RNH, Shattenkirk, Schwartz, Saad, Stepan, Rask, Jake Allen, David Savard, Adam Larsson, Brodin, and even Ovechkin won't be on the wrong side of 35 for their next deals at that point).