2021 Collective Bargaining Agreement Discussion Thread

[John_Havok]

Both sides are using the threat of missed games as leverage. I think there's about a zero percent chance that this happens. It really shouldn't happen either. A sense of urgency is the only way things will get done.

 

I think we do miss some spring training games, but I also doubt any regular season will be missed.

[John_Havok]

Confirmed the MLB owners contingent arrived at the hotel an hour ago. Should be in the middle of the proposal right now.

[Jays24]

Confirmed the MLB owners contingent arrived at the hotel an hour ago. Should be in the middle of the proposal right now.

 

Hope they can nail this down now since any big delays here could start impacting the 2022 season, which means less money for both sides in the short term.

[Sammy225]

I wonder if a short Spring Training is going to benefit or hurt the remaining free agents. Teams could be randy to get them signed and give out contracts larger then what was anticipated.

[John_Havok]

What we know so far (via Even Drelich of The Athletic):

 

The Major League Baseball Players Association dropped its request to introduce an age-based free agency system into the sport on Monday, withdrawing a proposal in one of the three major areas MLB had shown no interest in changing, a person with knowledge of the negotiations told The Athletic.

 

 

That means the amount of service time it takes a player to reach free agency — six years — is most likely going to remain unchanged whenever the sides reach a new deal. The players had previously proposed a system to get some players to free agency after five years if they had reached a certain age: 30 1/2, and then eventually, 29 1/2.

 

 

The union also revised its proposal to alter revenue sharing between the teams, another of the three areas MLB has resisted changes toward — and traditionally, a hot-button topic for the owners themselves. Between revenue sharing and free agency, the union feels it made two significant concessions.

 

 

The union on Monday also rejected most if not all of what MLB had proposed in the sides’ most recent meeting.

 

 

With the time-to-free-agency question gone, the two major hurdles remaining are whether MLB could become amenable to any changes to revenue sharing; and what will happen to the other particularly contentious bucket, the time it takes a player to reach arbitration. The players’ decision to drop their request to get players to free agency sooner wasn’t particularly surprising, considering what the union has been talking about for years, publicly, is the plight of younger players.

 

 

The union’s proposal to get players to arbitration after two years from November went unchanged on Monday. At the time, the league said it had no interest in discussing it.

[John_Havok]

Summary: Sounds like they're taking the road I thought might be the most productive, dispensing with some unattainable changes and focusing on a couple they really want.

[jerb]

 

Bob Nightengale

@BNightengale

 

The players union has agreed to drop its proposal for earlier free agency and lowered their proposal for reduced revenue sharing from $100 million to about $30 million. Talks continue tomorrow

 

Bob Nightengale

@BNightengale

 

Progress: The last time MLB and the players association met face-to-face in Texas the meeting lasted 7 minutes.

Today’s session was about two hours and included significant proposals

[John_Havok]

So far, the most important words i have read...

 

"talks continue tomorrow."

 

Nobody took their ball and went home. Progress.

[AdamGreenwood]

Gotta love union negotiations.

 

Here are six crazy ludicrous things we want.

Look, we dropped two of them. We made huge concessions. Since, we're being so agreeable, it's only fair that you give us the other four absurd asks.

[Sammy225]

So far, the most important words i have read...

 

"talks continue tomorrow."

 

Nobody took their ball and went home. Progress.

 

You wonder what could of happened if they had a few f***ing meetings in December.... Good Lord

[John_Havok]

Gotta love union negotiations.

 

Here are six crazy ludicrous things we want.

Look, we dropped two of them. We made huge concessions. Since, we're being so agreeable, it's only fair that you give us the other four absurd asks.

 

I guess you missed all the ludicrous ideas from the owners that were submitted first. And dropping some issues off the table IS actually concession since that topic will no longer be on the table for discussions, which is exactly what the owners want. Giving the other party something they want is the definition of a concession.

[Grant77]

I guess you missed all the ludicrous ideas from the owners that were submitted first. And dropping some issues off the table IS actually concession since that topic will no longer be on the table for discussions, which is exactly what the owners want. Giving the other party something they want is the definition of a concession.

 

Greenwood has never been wrong about anything in his life. All of the players proposals were ludicrous. Ludicrous I tell you!

 

It's very encouraging to me to see some concessions being made. Anyone who has been a part of negotiations like I have can tell you that it is a positive step.

[glory]

The fact that their next meeting is tomorrow and not 10+ days from now is probably the first glimmer of hope since December 1.

[Spanky99]

That's far better news than I expected, and as JH points out their getting back at it tomorrow. They should've done this ages ago though, f***ing MLB.

[Spanky99]

The fact that their next meeting is tomorrow and not 10+ days from now is probably the first glimmer of hope since December 1.

 

Indeed.

[Jimcanuck]

Promising report.... so we will see. Compromise!

[John_Havok]

[Stangstag]

 

That’s good I guess?

[John_Havok]

That’s good I guess?

 

I take it as such. It was heated, and they're talking again tomorrow. Seems like that's better than being heated and having no more talks scheduled. Baby steps I guess.

[Ehjays]

MLB Reportedly Expresses Willingness To Cancel Games As Lockout Continues

By Anthony Franco | January 24, 2022 at 10:30pm CDT

 

On the heels of the MLB Players Association’s economics proposal this afternoon, Major League Baseball is preparing to make some form of counteroffer tomorrow. That’ll mark the first back-to-back negotiating sessions since the league instituted a lockout on December 2. Even as negotiations may finally be picking up steam, various reports characterized today’s meeting as contentious.

 

Ben Nicholson-Smith of Sportsnet adds some context to the continued tension, reporting (on Twitter) that the league expressed a willingness to accept the forfeiture of regular season games as the lockout drags on. MLB continues to maintain hope about reaching a new collective bargaining agreement on time to play a full schedule, but today’s session was the first at which owners outwardly maintained their willingness to lose games, according to Nicholson-Smith. Evan Drellich of the Athletic writes that some on the players’ side believed the league’s message amounted to a threat. For its part, MLB pushed back against that notion, with a league spokesman telling Drellich the league’s message was “mischaracterized and not a fair representation of the discussion.”

 

Even if MLB indeed suggested it was amenable to the possibility of losing games, that’d hardly be surprising. Admitting it’s unwilling to face the possibility of losing games would deal a blow to the league’s negotiating leverage, after all. As the scheduled start to the season gets closer, both MLB and the MLBPA are incentivized to overstate to one another their resolution to hold out for concessions from the other party.

 

It remains to be seen whether MLB’s alleged rhetoric proves to be anything more than a negotiating ploy. The league would stand to lose gate revenue for cancelation of games during Spring Training. More meaningfully, it’d face the loss of both gate and broadcast revenue for canceled regular season contests. A work stoppage carrying into the regular season, in particular, might also deal an incalculable blow to fan morale that could persist beyond eventual agreement on a new CBA.

 

In November, Commissioner Rob Manfred drew a distinction between an offseason work stoppage and one that ultimately results in game cancelations. “I can’t believe there’s a single fan in the world who doesn’t understand that an offseason lockout that moves the process forward is different than a labor dispute that costs games,” Manfred told reporters at the time, shortly before the lockout began.

 

Yet even if it’s an unsurprising tack, it’s at least somewhat notable MLB has seemingly taken the step of declaring their willingness to accept the financial consequences of losing games for the first time. Players are obviously facing financial pressures of their own. Players aren’t compensated for Spring Training, so their potential lost revenue doesn’t loom quite as imminent as that of owners. Canceled regular season games — and the forfeiture of salaries for those contests — would be a far more notable development. The MLBPA has set aside an undisclosed amount of funding for players in case a work stoppage lingers into the season, but there’s no doubt that’d prove far less lucrative than the salaries players would receive if gameplay were to proceed as scheduled.

 

The regular season is currently set to begin on March 31. It is generally expected that a new CBA would need to be in place by around the beginning of March in order for the regular season to begin on time. That’d leave around a month for teams to conduct their remaining offseason business and for players to report and build up during an abbreviated Spring Training period.

[John_Havok]

What would be an incredible move by the owners if they want to win the court of public opinion... end the lockout and then make it a players decision to either strike... or play without a CBA.

[Ehjays]

What would be an incredible move by the owners if they want to win the court of public opinion... end the lockout and then make it a players decision to either strike... or play without a CBA.

 

Really, Their strategy of locking the players out and Wiping the websites clean of all the players names etc really had no affect. The only thing it accompished was making the owners look bad.

 

Time to do something differant, and yes maybe what you are suggesting. Just keep the talk rolling. I just dont have any faith in the leaders on either side.

[Jimcanuck]

Really, Their strategy of locking the players out and Wiping the websites clean of all the players names etc really had no affect. The only thing it accompished was making the owners look bad.

 

Time to do something differant, and yes maybe what you are suggesting. Just keep the talk rolling. I just dont have any faith in the leaders on either side.

 

Different than what you said yesterday.

 

f*** that, get it ironed out now. I don't want to go through this every year. Baseball is f***ed if this becomes an annual event as well. So both sides should be locked in a room and dont come out until you have a deal.

[John_Havok]

From Bob Nightengale:

 

The two sides argued Monday, and the meeting was contentious at times, but there was at least a scent of optimism Monday that the Major League Baseball season, perhaps even spring training, will start on time.

 

The Major League Baseball Players Association and MLB officials declined public comment, but there finally was movement.

 

In their last face-to-face negotiations on Dec. 1 in Irving, Texas, their meeting lasted seven minutes.

 

The meeting Monday at the Major League Baseball Players Association office lasted two hours.

 

And after only two negotiating sessions in the last 54 days, they now have another meeting scheduled Tuesday in New York with MLB making a counterproposal.

 

The union, according to an official with direct knowledge of the negotiations, presented a broad-based proposal that included two major concessions. The union for the first time withdrew its request to reduce free agency from the current six years with an age-based free agent system. The players originally proposed a system for players to reach free agency at five years if they were at least 29 ½ years of age.

 

The union also agreed to scale back its proposal to reduce revenue sharing among teams from $100 million to about $30 million.

 

The official spoke to USA TODAY Sports on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the negotiations.

 

Still, before anyone starts celebrating, or team officials can actually speak to their own players, significant obstacles remain to reach a new collective bargaining agreement in time for the start of spring training, scheduled for Feb. 16 in Arizona and Florida.

 

The union rejected MLB’s last proposal to pay players on a formula consisting of statistical evaluations such as WAR, and eliminating the Super 2 class where there are huge salary disparities based simply on whether a player ranks among the top 22% in service time. The union still is asking arbitration rights for players to be reduced from three years to two years of major league service. The union wants to expand the pool of salary arbitration-eligible players, believing they should have the right to advocate for a higher salary through independent arbitrators.

 

The union also rejected MLB’s proposal that teams who have a top 100 prospect will be rewarded a first-round draft pick if the prospect wins the Rookie of the Year award the first year, or a second-round pick if he finishes among the top three in voting. Teams would also receive a first-round pick if the player finishes in the top three in the MVP or Cy Young races or a second-round pick for finishing in the top five in his first three years.

 

This, at least, theoretically, MLB said, would help stop teams from manipulating service time to keep their top prospects in the minors at the start of their rookie season to gain an extra year of control considering the tremendous value of first-round picks. There are 51 players on Baseball America’s top 100 prospect list who were first-round draft picks, and another nine drafted in the second round.

 

The union believes that a better system would be to increase service time based on a performance and award package, which would have permitted a player such as Kris Bryant to reach free agency a year earlier if he wasn’t kept in the minors for two weeks to open the 2015 season.

 

MLB offered an NBA-style draft lottery on Jan. 13, involving the first three picks each year to help curb the tanking issue among teams. The union wants the lottery to instead consist of the top eight picks. The NBA has a draft lottery that includes the 14 non-playoff teams, with the league’s worst team guaranteed to pick no lower than fifth.

 

The two sides still have not budged from their last proposals involving the luxury tax and minimum salaries.

 

Major League Baseball offered to increase the luxury tax from $210 million to $214 million, escalating to $220 million at the end of the five-year CBA with increased penalties (50% tax and surrendering a third-round pick) for crossing the threshold. The union is seeking an increase starting at $245 million with decreased penalties.

 

The union wants the league minimum salary of $570,500 to be increased to $775,000. MLB offered to raise the minimum salary from $570,500 to $600,000, $650,000 for players with at least one year of service and $700,000 for at least two years of service.

 

The two sides have already all but officially agreed to a universal DH with the elimination of draft pick compensation that penalizes teams for signing premier free-agent players. The union also is willing to expand the postseason from 10 teams to 12, but MLB is seeking a 14-team format.

 

Now, it may be a matter of who blinks first. They have about two weeks to reach an agreement to avoid the delay of spring training, and a deadline of about March 1 to avoid delaying or shortening the 162-game season.

 

The union still believes that MLB has not come close to addressing its biggest concerns of increasing the pay to younger players, teams’ willingness to compete instead of tank, and increasing spending by clubs without the luxury tax acting more like a salary cap.

 

MLB argues that it is offering significant concessions.

 

It’s unknown what happens next when the two sides meet for the second time in 24 hours, but finally, and mercifully, they are at the bargaining table, actually talking face to face.

[glory]

It feels like the only real "win" the PA can get is if the owners agree to arb after year 2. They have already given up on earlier free agency, so beyond that there really isn't any other realistic way for players to get paid more earlier other than an extra year of arbitration. The owners appear to be dead set against it, but I feel like that's something they might eventually bend on if the PA concedes other things (14 playoff teams, leaving the luxury tax around where it is, etc). Both sides seem fine with raising the minimum, they can probably meet somewhere in the middle on that one.

[John_Havok]

It feels like the only real "win" the PA can get is if the owners agree to arb after year 2. They have already given up on earlier free agency, so beyond that there really isn't any other realistic way for players to get paid more earlier other than an extra year of arbitration. The owners appear to be dead set against it, but I feel like that's something they might eventually bend on if the PA concedes other things (14 playoff teams, leaving the luxury tax around where it is, etc). Both sides seem fine with raising the minimum, they can probably meet somewhere in the middle on that one.

 

Yeah, I think raising the minimum and early career money is the goal for the PA this go around. If I were them, I'd be shooting for a minimum of 750K with annual escalators that increase based on the greater or some % of total revenues, or a flat # like 50,000. I would then hold as firm as possible on getting to arbitration for year 3.

 

Anyone know where we can view what the average Super 2 salary was in the past 5 years?

 

Just thinking that as a fallback if they can't hold out for arbitration starting in year 3, they could just use a simpler system of Year 1, 750,000, year 2 players 1,000,000 and year 3 could be something that is less, but somewhere close to the average super 2 contract over the past 5 years.

[glory]

Yeah, I think raising the minimum and early career money is the goal for the PA this go around. If I were them, I'd be shooting for a minimum of 750K with annual escalators that increase based on the greater or some % of total revenues, or a flat # like 50,000. I would then hold as firm as possible on getting to arbitration for year 3.

 

Anyone know where we can view what the average Super 2 salary was in the past 5 years?

 

Just thinking that as a fallback if they can't hold out for arbitration starting in year 3, they could just use a simpler system of Year 1, 750,000, year 2 players 1,000,000 and year 3 could be something that is less, but somewhere close to the average super 2 contract over the past 5 years.

 

If I were the players, I'd take the L on the league minimum just to get arbitration after year 2. Getting arbitration for year 3 is more important than a marginal increase in years 1 and 2. That's why the owners are going to fight like hell not to do it, but the players have to figure out a way to get it done. If they miss on that as well, then the owners would have gotten another TKO in CBA negotiations.

[John_Havok]

If I were the players, I'd take the L on the league minimum just to get arbitration after year 2. Getting arbitration for year 3 is more important than a marginal increase in years 1 and 2. That's why the owners are going to fight like hell not to do it, but the players have to figure out a way to get it done. If they miss on that as well, then the owners would have gotten another TKO in CBA negotiations.

 

True, but the average MLB career lasts 2.7 years. Getting guaranteed money in years 1, 2 and 3 would realistically have the greatest impact on players salaries.

 

I agree that arbitration for year 3 would be a win for the players, but if that's their only win, it's not much of one. There's a ridiculous amount of PAs being taken by players in years 1, 2 and 3 of service time that accounts for nearly nothing of overall payroll. I know that they need to make less money than stars and established players, but adding 200K to the minimum salary in year 1 and more for years 2 and 3 would actually be quite significant across the entire league

[John_Havok]

Ah there it is, found my post from earlier on in this thread:

 

"Among all players to step on the field in 2019, 63.2% had less than three years of service time. They accounted for 53.6% of days of service time accumulated, but they combined for only 9.8% of player pay."

 

63.2% of players in games last season had less than 3 years of service time. less than 10% of the leagues payroll.

 

Those are the players the PA is fighting for this time around. I totally get that it's never going to be significant, like 40% of the league payroll of course, but even moving that needle to 15% or even 20% would basically amount to the same thing as a salary floor.

[jerb]

 

Jeff Passan

@JeffPassan

 

Labor talks are over. Here's what happened.

 

- MLB agreed to accept parameters of a pre-arbitration bonus pool for top 30 WAR. MLBPA seeking $105M. League offered $10M.

- MLB offered minimum raise to $615K. MLBPA wants $775K.

- MLB withdrew offer to change arbitration structure

 

 

Jeff Passan

@JeffPassan

 

There is no deal today. There never was going to be a deal today.

 

The takeaway: A pre-arb bonus pool gets the best young players paid more. Players wanted it, and it's a good thing for them. Players are laughing at the $10M offer. It's far too low. Negotiations will change that.