Thread by @EugeneFreedman

I wonder if we should just start calling him Union Buster. This is one of those purported two-sided columns that is egregious. I'll explain why in this thread.

Buster think that Tony Clark's actions are brinkmanship. There's no evidence for that, yet he states it repeatedly. 1/

https://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/status/1269639394555842560

As I've explained in countless threads, the MLBPA has no duty to bargain over the pro rata pay issue. Although wages is a mandatory subject of bargaining, once the parties have reached agreement (March MOU) the duty to bargain has been met. It only may be reopened upon 2/

mutual consent. It is not the MLBPA and Clark who are insisting on reopening a foreclosed subject. It is MLB. I'm not sure how Clark's strategy is brinkmanship by merely insisting on living with a mutually agreed upon proposal.

All labor bargaining is based upon obligations 3/

created by law. Some things are required. Other things are discretionary. Finally, some are illegal. In this case, it is discretionary, because the mandatory obligation has been met.

But, then Union Buster gets even more egregious. He wants MLBAPA to bring in the other 4/

sports unions to evaluate their bargaining. One of those unions doesn't even have binding arbitration for discipline grievances. Seriously. They give final discretion to the Commissioner to decide discipline after arbitration. The core due process workplace issue has never 5/

existed in their CBA and they are going to evaluate MLBPA? They all have salary caps. They all have percentage based revenue sharing agreements between management and the union. Some have individual player salary limitations. Yes, please Buster, let's have them tell MLBPA how 6/

to do it better so that baseball ownership group can get what it's been proposing for decades, only to be thwarted by the strong collective bargaining posture and solidarity of the Union's members.

Think about this. LeBron James's salary can be no more than $37.5M. 7/

Same with Steph Curry. Same with everyone. In 1997-98 Jordan's salary was $33M+. 22 years later and essentially no change in the highest paid player. Who does that benefit? Not the players.

Does he suggest management have the same evaluation of its strategy? Nope. 8/

Nothing to evaluate Commissioner Manfred's tactics. Nothing to evaluate how the other leagues were able to reach agreement so quickly on how to return to their field of play.

Just another pretend fair and balanced evaluation. Tanking. This is an issue with the PA, but also 9/

one between owners themselves. Moreover, it's another "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today" type promise from management. Players make a deal now that undermines the present & future, but management will look at this thing in the future. They promise. 10/

What's funny is that when Buster first floated management's proposal for a revenue split before anyone else, I criticized him for it and tried to explain to him the duty to bargain. He reflexively wrote "you didn't read the article." Over and over again no matter what I wrote.11/

He insisted his idea took care of the players' health. After all, he suggested they should be able to opt out. I continued to explain the fact that the MLBPA had no duty to bargain pay. He kept coming back to "you didn't read the article." It was clear to me he had merely 12/

published a trial balloon from the Commissioner. It took another week or so before it actually was the Commissioner's proposal. But, instead of 51/49, it was 50/50. Nice change Union Buster.

I have a feeling this one is another management suggestion to try to undermine Union.