Thread by @EugeneFreedman

Let's talk about lawsuits. Ok. Let's stop. There can't be any lawsuits. This is a labor negotiations. There can be Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) charges filed with the National Labor Relations Board and grievances over failure to comply with existing language. Federal courts 1/

are empowered with limited jurisdiction. They do not have primary jurisdiction over any matter that is currently a dispute between the parties. I've previously covered a grievance here:

https://twitter.com/EugeneFreedman/status/1270333308132524038

I intend a long piece about a grievance over the "best efforts" 2/

provision in the March Agreement as soon as we have a slow day. But, a grievance ultimately ends with binding grievance arbitration under the procedure contained in the parties' Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). It's the same process as the Union used in the collusion 3/

cases in the 80s to enforce a provision of the CBA. It's the same process Ryan Braun used to overturn his suspension and ARod went through to challenge his. (There are different burdens of proof in discipline cases, but that's for another discussion). This is also not the 4/

same process as the salary arbitration process.

A grievance to enforce the March Agreement is no different than the term CBA (or what baseball calls the Basic Agreement). All mid-term agreements are enforceable throughout the CBA's grievance arbitration article. Filing a ULP 5/

for failure to bargain in good faith could go through the NLRB's process or it can go through the grievance arbitration process if the CBA allows for broad filings covering any matter that affects terms and conditions of employment. I haven't looked at the MLB-MLBPA CBA to see 6/

how broad the grievance process is. I will soon. But, the NLRB does not follow the colloquial "bad faith" discussion that the parties have alleged against each other and the media has cited. It's much more legalistic. First and foremost, there must be a duty to bargain for 7/

there to be a failure to bargain in good faith. As I've stated countless times, the March Agreement does not require the PA to negotiate pay; it's already been agreed. So, without a duty to bargain, the PA cannot engage in bad faith by refusing. Don't take my word for it. Take 8/

Pat Houlihan, MLB legal counsel, who acknowledged in his May 22 letter to the Players Association. "We agree with the Association that, under the Agreement, players are not required to accept less than their full prorated salary.’’

No duty to bargain-no bad faith ULP. 9/

On the management bad faith bargaining, even making essentially same proposal repeatedly in a different package doesn't necessarily constitute failure to bargain in good faith. It could be Boulwarism, although that's a bit different.

Similarly to the PA's duty to bargain 10/

over pay, the Commissioner has certain rights in the March Agreement regarding setting the schedule. I'm still in the process of evaluating how broad those rights are. But, merely setting the schedule itself (had he done that today), would not have constituted bad faith. 11/

The trouble is the failure to meet the "best efforts" clause of the March Agreement. And, that's a grievance, not a ULP.

If there is a duty and there is a failure to bargain in good faith, then the NLRB Regional Director will issue a complaint and it will go to a hearing 12/

before an Administrative Law Judge. The NRLB serves as the prosecutor and the charged party defends itself. But, I'm not sure anyone violated their duty to bargain here, so I think that's just PR "bad faith" and not legal failure to bargain in good faith. As I review the 13/

March Agreement, I will be able to provide more on whether there was a duty and a breach of that duty. Stay tuned. /end