Open Now
Open Now
Watch now

MLB-union tensions escalate, but more is at stake in this fight: Sherman

MLB and the players association are in a familiar situation unfamiliarly. They are fighting about money. Duh. Players and owners have done that since the inception of the game, quite publicly since the players association was formally recognized as a union in 1966. Within that frame, what occurred Tuesday is as routine as a pregame …

MLB and the players association are in a familiar situation unfamiliarly.

They are fighting about money. Duh. Players and owners have done that since the inception of the game, quite publicly since the players association was formally recognized as a union in 1966.

Within that frame, what occurred Tuesday is as routine as a pregame national anthem: MLB made a financial offer, the union was irate about it.

What’s different, of course, is the dispute is occurring within a pandemic, which changes the financial picture now and at least into the near future while putting public and historic pressure on both sides to find a solution to allow as much of a season as possible.

At this moment, the second-to-fourth biggest baseball leagues are either playing (South Korea, Taiwan) or about to start (Japan). The NBA and NHL are inching closer to firm plans for a restart. So if MLB does not play, think of the stain on all the leadership involved. Think of the long-term financial impact to both sides of being out of sight until next spring training while driving even the most loyal fans out of their minds. Think about the opportunity missed to be the first major North American team sport to play — even if by just a few weeks — to audiences so sports crazed they are producing record TV numbers to watch two quarterbacks and two golfers play 18 holes.

Usually what drives an agreement is a deadline, but here that is a moving target. Reverse engineer: MLB wants to start by July 4. To get in three weeks of spring means having players in position by mid-June. But there would be much work to do upon an agreement to get sites up to code and players there for pre-camp screening.

So every day counts. The longer the fight the greater the risk to not just reputations, but bodies. The sooner players can get to camps and the longer they can stay there the better. Because players are routine-oriented and routines are going to be greatly disrupted. Over time part of what players have won and often what teams want to provide for upgraded performance is greater comforts in clubhouses and personal coaching, etc. There is going to be, at minimum, a scaling back that will need an adjustment phase.

I suspect if this fight drags on through this week then don’t be surprised if President Trump — as polarizing as he might be — tries to use the influence of his office to implore both sides to work it out for public good; to help the economy, to provide entertainment to the country and to offer televised optimism that with new practices businesses will return to operation.

Weeds are growing outside an empty Citi Field.N.Y. Post: Charles Wenzelberg

The sides might need the mediation. MLB’s first offer was so punch-in-the-face not conciliatory that it galvanized the players, moving one of the most influential, Nationals ace Max Scherzer, to tweet Wednesday night, “After discussing the latest developments with the rest of the players there’s no reason to engage with MLB in any further compensation reductions.”

The anger is understandable. The union felt MLB delayed a financial offer for two weeks to shorten the clock and, thus, pressure the players to accept their plan because the public is going to generally see the players as the greedy side, no matter the realities. The union hates the concept offered in which lower-paid players would receive most of their prorated salary and the top earners — such as Scherzer — would receive less, often less than half. The union views this as an attempt to split the constituency. It also is revenue sharing in different clothing — just in this case Gerrit Cole and Giancarlo Stanton would be propping up Gleyber Torres and Luke Voit.

The players are concerned they are in the dark about the true state of owner finances, at a time when management is claiming the bottom line is so bleak that the pain must be shared. Scherzer also wrote, “MLB’s economic strategy would completely change if all the documentation were to become public information.”

But players never have complete knowledge of owner revenue, especially when it comes to what is truly being earned from regional sports networks and land owned around stadiums. Still, the union always comes to a deal despite its very understandable mistrust.

That players — even while upset — are flocking to spring training sites means they want to play, so the union needs to work through the mistrust. If the owners truly want to play, then the players even have some leverage, as long as what Scherzer was throwing this time was a standard fastball of rhetoric. ESPN reported Wednesday night that the union is planning to send an economic proposal to MLB by week’s end, though without coming off its stance that players should be paid their prorated 2020 salaries based on games played.

But if they send a proposal back, at least they are negotiating. Maybe the players could eventually trade some short-term loss for big-picture gain. An example: Take 60 percent of prorated salaries now across the board in exchange for raising the minimum wage the next two years to $750,000 then $850,000, which helps the bottom end players. Then demand no luxury tax thresholds/penalties for 2021 and 2022. The expectation is that the financial downturn is going to impact those seeking larger contracts, particularly free agents. But if the Dodgers or Yankees or Cubs want to spend, let there at least not be an artificial barrier to doing that.

The owners get short-term cash flow they desire without full prorated salaries in 2020, the players receive an avenue to improve their financial lot in uncertain financial times the next two years. It is called a compromise. That would be quite familiar to where these two sides end up at the conclusion of negotiations. That should even go for unfamiliar times.

Follow us on Google News

Filed under