Atlanta Braves and their Union are being played by MLB

This is one game the Atlanta Braves and the MLBPA just can’t win.

MLB and their team owners have, as expected, released their second economic proposal to the Players’ Association today.  It appears designed to pit player against player while making us all wonder if there will be any Atlanta Braves season in 2020… at all.

Let’s review:

• In March, owners and players agreed on a pro-rated salary structure.  In other words:  you play 50% of games, you’ll get 50% of your salary.
• What hasn’t been often reported is that this isn’t exactly what was agreed to:  that pro-rated salaries provision was conditioned on having fans in the stands. 
• This is certainly the stance of the owners, though the union has been fuzzy — perhaps even in denial — on this key point.
• A key provision from the players’ perspective was their demand for a full-year credit of MLB service time for the purposes of arbitration and free agency.  That remains in place – and would be something that would increase costs to teams next year.
• 2 weeks ago, the owners proposed a 50/50 revenue split from among all revenues earned this season.
• The union has rejected that as a de facto salary cap – something they steadfastly have been opposed to for decades… even though it might actually leave them in a better financial position for this year.
• Certainly, the MLBPA would not want to even hint allowing that kind of change in direction as we’re just 18 months ahead of the expiration of the current Collective Bargaining Agreement.

That brings us to today’s new ownership proposal.  It wasn’t good.

It’s a “sliding scale”, which would effectively compress all salaries — similar to that of an aggressively progressive tax structure.

Under this proposal, the elite players end up with less than half of their already pro-rated dollars.  Those near the major-league minimum?  They get roughly 9% under the previously-expected 50%.  That works out to roughly $262,125.

Cole Hamels and Marcel Ozuna?  Both have Atlanta Braves one-year contracts for $18 million.  Under this plan they might end up with something just under five million dollars.

Meanwhile, some of the younger Atlanta Braves might want (need) every dime of that $262K.

The MLB strategy

This is why I believe the owners are playing the union like a piano.

• Accept this plan or reject it (the MLB Players Association is going to reject it), the revenues are what they are.  Even if ownership pays out more now, they will simply refuse to make big-money offers in the near future to make up for this year’s shortfall.
• This is why deferred money plans don’t help matters for ownership:  if you have $10 to spend, it doesn’t matter whether you spend $5 now with the promise of $5 more later or make the choice to spend it all today… it’s still just $10.
• The union is effectively wanting the $10 now and business as usual for free agency to come… another $10.  That won’t happen.
  • So “good luck” to Mookie Betts, et al.
• If the union demands that the full pro-rated numbers are honored as (they believe they were) negotiated in March, the ownership will simply say “okay – we’ll no longer play 82 games… now it’s 70… or 60… or whatever number they want to get to the same amount of expenditures.
• The league has the power to impose the length of the season, and the belief is that the real money comes from the playoff games — the regular season represents real losses for the owners.  That’s why we haven’t heard anything about maximizing the schedule lately (adding double-headers, reducing days off, etc).  That’s also why an 82 game schedule is the maximum season length we’ll see.
• By introducing the ‘sliding scale’, young players with more to lose might be more apt to vote for such a plan, because it protects them more.  Almost any other outcome would be worse for them.  This is why I believe the union leadership will refuse to bring his proposal to their members for a vote:  they will effectively protect the interests of the elite in doing so.
• With Governments bending rules to accommodate sports, the KBO on TV, and the Japanese league set to start on June 19, ownership has to believe that the pressure is on the players to cave… particularly as many clubs are preparing to furlough their own staffs.

The 50/50 revenue split plan thus may have been the best plan the players will ever have seen… and yet it was a poison pill:  an offer sure to be rejected.

At this point, the owners are holding all of the best cards.  They know it, too.  They can manipulate the season to get what they want in any negotiation from this point forward.

The union has two options left:  a strike (which is what an end to negotiations would effectively be) or a capitulation.  The damage to the game would be immense if Option 1 is taken.  It might not even survive well if Option 2 is taken.