The Lockout Begins
Major League Baseball’s 26-year run of labor peace is officially over. As anticipated, MLB and the MLBPA were unable to reach terms on a new CBA ahead of last night’s 11:59 p.m. deadline. Shortly thereafter, MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred announced that the league had locked out the players:
Read a letter from the Commissioner: https://t.co/P4gRGSlfsu pic.twitter.com/zI40uGLTni
— MLB (@MLB) December 2, 2021
For its part, the MLBPA issued a statement in response:
Statement from the Major League Baseball Players Association: pic.twitter.com/34uIGf762W
— MLBPA Communications (@MLBPA_News) December 2, 2021
Neither Manfred’s letter, nor the MLBPA’s response, were unexpected, as both sides will be posturing to gain the moral high ground in the coming days. While the union is certainly correct that the owners weren’t legally obligated to implement a lockout, Manfred’s belief that this step increases the odds that the dispute is resolved before it disrupts too much of the regular season is a reasonable one as well. And although the union would be correct to take issue with the way the commissioner characterized the state of the negotiations to date, it is also true that the players appear to be the ones seeking the more significant modifications to the sport’s existing economic model in an attempt to arrest several escalating trends that have proven unfavorable for the MLBPA’s membership in recent years.
Again, it is important to remember that both sides are ultimately looking to maximize their bargaining leverage over one another. And in this case, the owners have determined that implementing a labor stoppage during the offseason — rather than allowing the players to elect to strike in the middle of the season — best serves their interests.
So now we wait. As I explained yesterday, while the MLBPA has a couple of potential options it could take in response to the lockout, it appears that the players have — not surprisingly — elected to continue to negotiate as a union, at least for now.
And considering how relatively few leaks there have been coming out of the negotiations to date — itself a positive sign compared to the seemingly constant media posturing the two sides engaged in back in 2020 — any substantive updates may prove to be somewhat few and far between in the coming days and weeks.
Ultimately, however, all of this is — again — very much expected. As I wrote yesterday, until we get to late-February without a deal in sight, there is not necessarily cause for concern that the lockout will endanger the start of the regular season. Deadlines tend to spur action in cases like this, and the next real deadline for the parties is the start of spring training, when the owners will start to lose actual revenue, and most of the players will really start to feel the pinch of being locked out.
Until then, the most likely outcome remains that a new deal is reached before the lockout meaningfully disrupts the 2022 season. Indeed, both sides have a lot to lose should this dispute drag on into the summer.
Nathaniel Grow is an Associate Professor of Business Law and Ethics and the Yormark Family Director of the Sports Industry Workshop at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business. He is the author of Baseball on Trial: The Origin of Baseball's Antitrust Exemption, as well as a number of sports-related law review articles. You can follow him on Twitter @NathanielGrow. The views expressed are solely those of the author and do not express the views or opinions of Indiana University.
Thank you Nathaniel, very cool!
That’s the encouraging thing for us as fans: both sides want baseball to happen. So that gives me confidence that something will be decided before Spring Training.
I agree that in the big picture these press releases are not that bad. But it’s still frustrating to see in the MLB press release innuendos about the supposedly extreme proposals. Because now we’re going to have a million news articles about whether the players proposals were so extreme, and then we’ll get leaks about management proposals, and we’ll debate whether they were extreme. I think there’s a right way and a wrong way to cover a labor stoppage in the offseason (which is barely a labor stoppage) and I’m a little afraid this is going to go the wrong way.
I would probably ignore most of that. Both sides are going to use extreme hyperbole to make the other side look bad
Yeah this is pretty much how I see it.
YOU WON’T BELIEVE THE PLAYERS’ OBSCENE DEMANDS!! (#7 is the ABSOLUTE WORST) *insert clickbait link here*
Well, it’s not like one side is going to say “we don’t want baseball to happen.” Or even “we want baseball, but ONLY on our terms and we are willing to blow up everything to get them.”
Well, the owners said exactly that in 2020.
As others have noted, the public statement from both the Commissioner and the Players Association appear to be following the standard lockout script to the letter. Express disappointment, casually blame the other side, try to play the public relations game.
I am hopeful that during this particular labor dispute between millionaires and billionaires that someone in power has the self awareness to realize that a public already beaten down by a global pandemic and the economic fallout that comes with it may have less patience than usual for their bullshit platitudes.
Exactly, why is it they think we, the paying public, need to pick sides? It doesn’t do them any good as it isn’t like we are going to be able to put pressure on one side or the other. We can’t vote them out. Not like we can chose to not go to the games as a protest – as who does that even hurt ? the owners who get less money today or the players who will get less in contracts next year? Silly.
All we want is to be entertained. Blaming one side of the other does not do any good for public relations.
Here is a better PR one that could have been released jointly: “We, the players and owners, are trying to come to an agreement that will have us play a full season in 2022. That is our goal. We currently have not reach that agreement. Both sides have their views on what is fair, this is a negotiation and we will work to figure out how best to move forward. Until then, thank you for your patience.”
There you go MLB and MLBPA, I have just saved you millions of dollars in PR as we don’t care who is the ‘bad guy’ here or who is not being flexible, just figure it out and get back to us when you are ready to play. meanwhile we will be entertained elsewhere.
Public opinion does matter to them both. They all have friends and neighbors and family, and beyond that, if the public as a whole decided one side or the other was definitely in the wrong, that side would be in real trouble.
If people believe the players are definitely in the right, then a new league could be born and the owners are left sitting on empty stadia and piles of debt.
If people believe the owners are definitely in the right, then the owners could end the lockout, and impose terms, and if the players went on strike, the owners could hire replacement players and no one would care all that much that we were watching overpaid minor leaguers for a year or two.
You need the threat that the public won’t put up with either replacement players or with going to a new (and almost certainly inferior league) in older and probably inferior stadia or else one side or the other has a clear win.
The public saying “a plague on both your houses” is the worst result, but the public going hard for one side or the other is a win for that side.
I also noticed that MLB.com took down all their articles about the recent free agents signings. Why would they do that? I guess I don’t see how that puts pressure on the players. Doesn’t that just make people further irritated at MLB?
The audience for the press releases are also the coalitions on either side. Each coalitions has deep internal conflicts and the most important negotiating asset will be the appearance of consensus within the coalition. Obviously, keeping the players all on message will be tough given the conflicts of interest. The press release serves as a coordinating tool for agents and players. The owner side obviously has big conflicts too. And some of these owners are not used to being told what to say. The process of drafting the commissioners release almost certainly serves more of an internal coordination role than marketing to fans.
Journalists (love you all) , of course, have to write about something!
I agree with what you are saying, but you can get this info out there to both sides with internal messaging vs PR releases. As a fan I just don’t want to see it. I see enough of this with the US politics and don’t need anyone telling me why they are good and the other side bad. Maybe it is a way to get more media coverage and they know many in the media like to write about this kind of stuff in good v bad terms, which says a lot about the media and those that consume it. Again, just give me the entertainment not the bs.
There’s a bit of game theory going on here. If both sides produce genial statements, they both win in the long run. If one side produces a positive statement and one a negative statement, it probably benefits the side with the negative statement.
One interesting thing here is the asymmetry involved. In an actual labor stoppage situation, it’s obvious how both sides lose. A a “real” lockout would have a devastating short-term impact for the players and not quite as devastating but longer-lasting impacts for the owners. This is much lower stakes than that, but the asymmetry is more pronounced. The fans souring on labor conflict will eventually hurt the players’ paychecks, but not anytime soon because the player salaries are only indirectly tied to revenues. The most immediate impact is on attendance and therefore the ownership.
So you would expect that the league would have much fewer incentives to attack the players than the reverse, but if you look at the statements the players’ one is squarely on the lockout itself, while the owners one is on the proposals. I think it probably has to do with the fact that a simple statement from the league saying that the lockout is just a formality keeps the focus on the lockout, which the league doesn’t want. But if they do keep attacking the players in press releases and leaks it’s not exactly in their long-term interests either.
It would be good to see the unofficial MLB Fans Collective post a statement in a fancy graphic that simply states “Get your act together or go screw.”
MLB. com should really have a comments section under the ‘Letter to fans’ post, so we could all enter that comment. If nothing else, their current content on mlb.com shows the audience how the site is nothing but a big money making shill service for the owners.
That’s because the owners are footing the bill for MLB.com
MLBPlayers.com will give you the opposite end of the spectrum
And Fangraphs is here for those in the middle
I never even knew that was a site. Thanks.
Hate the micro-aggressions both sides make in their statements. So petty to read. I understand it’s their livelihoods, but it makes the whole thing gross to follow. I just want baseball come Spring Training, and hopefully (but I guess can’t? I don’t know how this works) the Hot Stove stays hot.
Does anyone know why the players agreed to a luxury cap in the previous CBA? It seems like a huge piece of leverage they gave up for what exactly? I have trouble understanding what large concession they received that rivaled the luxury cap.
I vaguely remember that in the past they’ve largely represented themselves in negotiations and vs the owners unsurprisingly done very poorly. They’ve hired some big guns this time who are better at this than people who’s main job is throwing, catching and hitting stuff.
This is my main concern regarding the possibility of a lengthy work stoppage. The MLBPA has gotten embarrassed for decades in these negotiations to the point where the Rays can have an extended run as the best team in baseball with a strategy of never spending money. The player control scenarios are embarrassing and young players are being exploited. There is zero justification for the service clock to begin only when a player reaches the majors. Contracts don’t work like that in any other sport. The NHL’s system (three-year ELCs with limited RFA and an age factor baked in) is vastly superior (and fairer) than the current MLB setup.
That was a lot of words to say the MLBPA *needs* major concessions from the owners to level the playing field after getting dragged for so long. And I’m not sure the owners are going to be amenable to making those necessary changes, especially after they’ve become so accustomed to dunking on the players every time a CBA expires.
Yeah, I think this is how a lengthy stoppage could happen. If the players are determined to claw back some of the things they’ve given up in bad CBAs in the past few decades, it’s going to be really tough.
I honestly can’t remember the players getting anything of note for the
salary capluxury taxcompetitive balance tax. Ownership was very successful in selling it as a solution to making smaller market teams competitive. It also didn’t start for years and was phased in gradually, so the players currently in the union were mostly screwing players not yet in the union (pretty standard practice).1) Luxury tax evens the playing field between the Yankees and the smaller market teams.
2) More players play for the smaller market teams than the Yankees.
3) More players prefer luxury tax.
Competitive balance between teams vs. Letting bigger teams outspend their way to dominance
is not a simple tradeoff as one might think.
On one hand, you have NBA where the salary cap puts an artificial ceiling on superstar salaries and non-financial incentives play a huge role in player signings and trades.
On the other hand, you have Spanish La Liga where the top 2 teams of Real Madrid and FC Barcelona have combined for 16 titles in the last 20 years.
Of course, both are very successful leagues, which tells us that there is no right answer.
European football (soccer) is structured entirely differently from North American professional sports, so not a valid comparison at all.
You’ll have to do more to demonstrate your contention that the Yankees dominate US baseball. They haven’t won a championship in over a decade.
Have you seen the salaries in the NBA? Hard to say that the supermax contracts has been much of a ceiling.
They’re a ceiling alright, when one considers how much more important a single player is to team success in the NBA than in MLB. At one point, Lebron was earning $19 million when a WAR calculation indicated he was worth roughly $45–and that only accounts for on-court production. Add in marketability and it’s plausible that Lebron was getting a third of what he was worth. Kobe said that on the open market Lebron would have gotten $75 million per.
Edit: this was back in 2014, and the article with the math is entitled “How Much is Lebron Really Worth?” NBA revenue has exploded since then, so salaries at the top end have gone up, but I wonder how much they’ve gone up relative to what stars would get without the cap. I bet they are still dramatically underpaid.
Can someone explain what a lockout actually is? At this point, in the offseason, I’m not sure I quite understand what the actual consequences of this are.
See Nathaniel’s previous article.
The owners can save their ink. I’m squarely on the side of the players.
Why?
I really hope I’m wrong on this, but I think the owners will drag this out through February and April in the hopes of weakening the last somewhat strong players union among the major 4 sports in the US. Has there been any thought to the MLBPA starting a co-op league? Just spitballing here, but what if the players union contracted out with a live streaming service– Netflix just by way of example– to broadcast a league of say 15 teams in stadiums that were abandoned by MILB last year, offer public admittance, and equally split the proceeds among the members of the union. Sure, some players would be worried about injuries, but you can have larger rosters with just 15 teams….. I’m sure MLB lawyers would try to sue the heck out of that or at least get an injunction, but the threat of a co-op league could make owners realize that they are not really all that necessary….
A return to a form of barnstorming? That would be pretty cool.
I love baseball, this soap opera of wealthy people trying to get more money out of obscenely wealthy people is oddly titillating but hopefully doesn’t impact actual baseball happening.
I’m trying to remind myself that there are far more important things happening to people in way less fortunate circumstances that should probably get more of our attention (yes I know I’m on a baseball site).
In reading the last two articles from Prof. Grow, it has generated additional questions.
Is it possible, at some point this month, for Prof. Grow to host a chat that is advertised well in advance? I think that would be useful and interesting to the readership.
This is a fine idea. In the meantime, the latest episode of “Effectively Wild” has him on to answer questions from Ben and Meg (and maybe emails from listeners; I don’t know, it just dropped and I haven’t listened yet).
Step one in de-escalation tactics (escalation tactics??): release list of demands in Comic Sans font.
MISTER POLICE
YOU COULD HAVE
SAVED HER
I GAVE YOU ALL
THE CLUES
.^.^(*-*)
>–(.^^.)–<
.^.(.^^.)
Seeing a lot of takes about how this is about “millionaires vs billionaires,” and I think it really needs to be pointed out that a majority, if not outright supermajority, of MLBPA’s members are not millionaires at all. For every one star paid 8 digits+ a year, there’s probably fifteen to twenty pre-arb guys in MLBPA, and many if not most of those pre-arb guys are bouncing between AAA and the bigs, toiling for years (often a decade+ in the case of Latin American players) in the minors, riding buses constantly with bad pay and often worse housing. It’s these guys, especially the late bloomers whose hard work finally pays off in a late-twenties breakout, who the current CBA exploits most, and it’s these guys that the owners will fight the hardest to keep exploiting.
The problem is while the MLBPA says they’re gonna try to get some concessions for minor leaguers, they are really focused on the guys in the Bigs. And sure, they might not be stupid rich or even millionaires, but the minimum salary for an MLB player is $570k. 2 full years and he’s earned over $1M. I’m not saying it’s equitable, but think about it this way, if he plays 10 years and only the last one was in the MLB, his 10 year average is still higher than a huge chunk of baseball fans’. I don’t think that’s as easy a sell as some people think.
Both sides want and should get something to improve their way. Personally not concerned over the lockout, hope it costs them some money overall. Top concern is to keep the DH out of the NL.
Really? That’s your top concern? All I can respond with is (a) eyeroll, and (b) prepare to be upset. The players will get the universal DH, the owners will get expanded playoffs; it’s in the “everything else” that we may get something interesting or surprising.
Though if they bother to spend any time debating the DH rule at all it would be interesting if they modified it so that a starting pitcher who bats for himself can remain in the lineup as the DH for the rest of the game even when lifted from the mound for a reliever (hello Ohtani and any future two-way pitchers).
Why the need for the eyeroll? If I prefer baseball without (for those who prefer with, there is the AL) why wouldn’t that be my top concern? The majority of the other issues are just money related and wont do much to change the on-field product. I am prepared to be upset and care a lot less about watching baseball if it does happen. In my 30 years of watching baseball I almost never watch an AL game.
I’m with you. If NL adopts the DH, I’m done.