There are two paragraphs in this article that are frustrating. The first:
"A typical negotiation includes offers and counter-offers, but the league’s proposal did not lead to further discussion. Only last week did the league learn that the union had rejected its offer," 1/x
"and that the union would not counter it."

The second: Players last season received a combined $25 million in salary per day league-wide, so eliminating 26 days in April would cost them $650 million. But the league probably can make up a chunk of those days with split" 2/x
"doubleheaders, play into mid-October and possibly get to 154 games, at full pay. The players might want other benefits. The postseason would then extend into November, perhaps forcing the league to take a hit in its network television deals. But all of the elements" 3/x
"would be negotiable."

First, this isn't just an offer to buy a car that's for sale. It's an offer to buy a car that's not for sale. The parties have an agreement in place-the CBA. All labor negotiations are based on a duty to bargain. Once it has been fulfilled, there is 4/x
no responsibility to make an offer or counter offer or anything else. It's already a concluded subject. This includes the schedule, the playoffs, the number of games, etc.

What if I offer Ken that he give me $10,000 as a gift. Does he have to counter offer? Nope. So, to say 5/x
that typical negotiations have offers and counter-offers flies in the face of the fact that this isn't a negotiation. It's a unilateral offer to revise an existing agreement. There is no reciprocal duty, as there are in CBA negotiations or negotiations over new subjects. 6/x
Yes, all of these elements "would be negotiable," but that's only if MLBPA chooses to reopen the existing agreement, something they aren't interested in doing. All of the matters described are things that would benefit management.

I can't believe anyone connected with the 7/x
game believes a universal DH has similar value short or long-term as expanding the playoffs. Plus, MLB has the same interest in universal DH. MLB is offering something it wants, but saying that in order to get it, the MLBPA needs to also give MLB something else, even bigger 8/x
The linking of these two subject is management spin. It's not how negotiations take place at the table, where somewhat linked matters or subjects of equal value are sometimes agreed to simultaneously. The more reporters link these subjects, the more the public will believe 9/x
falsely that these are equivalent subjects.

The primary issue has always been the expansion of playoffs and the split of expanded playoff TV revenues. It was the issue last year, although obscured, and it's the issue now. It's the issue for the next CBA as well. /end

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with (((EugeneFreedman)))

(((EugeneFreedman))) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @EugeneFreedman

26 Jan
First, it's not an impasse, because there's no duty to bargain over things that are already in the CBA.

Second, the Commissioner cannot unilaterally suspend the opening of the season.

The only way MLB is going to get MLBPA to the table to negotiate over a later season start 1/
expanded playoffs, and the other bells and whistles, is if it agrees to something similar to the MLBPA's proposal from 2020 regarding the split of additional playoff TV revenue, maybe also other revenue such as streaming too. I don't say this based on any insider info. 2/
It's based on the status quo labor agreement, what the PA wants in the next round of term negotiations, and how it can leverage now to get what it wants moving forward. It has no incentive to agree to something less now. It only has disincentive. The deal to change things now 3/
Read 7 tweets
12 Jan
I just linked to my previous thread on this subject. I probably should also create a long thread in which I analyze the CBA provision related to national emergencies. I had some dialog with a national baseball writer that I will now thread for others to read. 1/x
I took a screenshot of the provision b/c it's too big to fit in one tweet. 2/x Image
The first thing that’s notable about it, compared to other force majeure provisions, is that it is in the Uniform Players Contract, not the CBA. The UPC is an appendix to the CBA, so it has the same force and effect, but applies to each player individually, not all players 3/x
Read 24 tweets
16 Jul 20
Here we are. We have an agreement, the season is moving forward, and @BNightengale is still carrying owners' water and posting their outrageous opinions about how it's all the Union's fault. Let's break it down in a thread.

Jerry Reinsdorf is one of the key architects of 1/
collusion. For those who don't remember, from 1985-87 MLB engaged in a violation of the CBA to prevent free agents from receiving any offers from any team other than their original team. It was a direct violation of the CBA. Andre Dawson had to offer a blank contract to the 2/
Cubs. Tim Raines, who was perhaps the best player in baseball at the time, was not offered a single contract and missed an entire month of play before returning to the Expos. Over three arbitration cases the owners had to pay millions of dollars in damages. Reinsdorf was on 3/
Read 18 tweets
23 Jun 20
Apparently there are a lot of columns declaring a pox on both houses today regarding MLB/MLBPA failing to reach an agreement. What's missing in that superficial analysis is that they DID reach agreement. The reached it nearly 3 months ago. The parties are now agreeing to live
with the agreement they reached, which provides MLBPA represented players with pro rata pay and the Commissioner with the authority to set the schedule after meeting certain criteria and discussing things with the PA. It did not require negotiations.

This outcome is a win-win
Here is a thread explaining why this is a win-win at this point:

But, there's more than that. And, it's an analysis based on the outcome and not the methods of achieving that outcome.
Read 15 tweets
17 Jun 20
This article by @KenDavidoff may have set a new low for both-sidesim. It completely ignores facts and doubles down on a completely and utterly debunked "smoking" published by @Joelsherman1. A short retort 1/
Davidoff: "With Major League Baseball dangling on a branch on the side of a cliff above shark-infested waters, in the wake of Manfred’s announcement Monday that he won’t unilaterally implement a 2020 restart schedule after all"

Wait, what? MLB is reaching out an olive branch
Actually, what has happened is MLB has walked itself back into a corner & needs a way out. MLB has attempted to renegotiate a mutually agreed March agreement. There is no reciprocal duty for the parties to do that, so the PA has said "no" about two dozen times publicly
Read 17 tweets
16 Jun 20
This article is a series of management falsehoods, presenting itself as a path forward. It's scary how a reporter would have missed everything that has gone on over the past few months, but apparently this one has. Let me hit the high notes in a thread 1/
Nightengale: "You don’t need a Twitter account to know the union and players are furious at Manfred. You don’t need to turn on the TV or radio to know that owners are incensed with the union." Why would the owners be incensed with the Union? Because they want to adhere to 2/
the contract they agreed to March 26? We hate that you agreed with us. We don't agree with ourselves anymore, so we are incensed with you. This is classic both-sides garbage. One party wants to break the negotiated agreement. The other party should be furious. 3/
Read 17 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!