I don’t know how he has done it, but I offer my sincere congratulations to Don Fehr, the executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Association.
I can hear you ask, “What has he possibly done to deserve praise?”
Here’s what:
More Top Picks Best Red Light Bulbs For Sleep
Despite the fact that many players are unhappy with the stalemated negotiations-possibly as high as 30 percent of them-they have remained silent. There has been a remarkable absence of public criticism.
“I have to give Fehr credit,” a member of the owners’ negotiating committee said on the condition of anonymity. “We have been very surprised he has kept them together. An even bigger surprise is that no players have spoken out.”
I have been surprised myself because for the last four to six weeks I have had a half-dozen calls from baseball insiders-umpires, general managers and agents-all of whom insist many of the players, particularly the big-name stars, are in various stages of rebellion.
It’s possible the curtain of silence may fall in Atlanta this week. Beginning Monday, Fehr will preside at a three-day meeting of the union’s 30-man executive board. The indications are that as many as 100 additional players, from the so-called rank and file, also will attend.
And if they do, I am fairly sure they wouldn’t be making the trip to say, “Good going, guys. Hang in there.”
I would expect the opposite: “Let’s get this thing settled.”
When the owners gave the union a 10-day reprieve in Leesburg, Va., Fehr promised to come away with a counterproposal to the owners’ demand for team salary caps or a luxury tax that would penalize the clubs whose player payrolls are in excess of the $35 million average.
At this point, it appears to be an insurmountable gulf. Essentially, here’s how it stands:
If a club increased its player payroll $15 million, from $35 million to $50 million, the union has agreed that the penalty would be $800,000.
According to the owners’ proposal, the penalty should be $25.3 million, 15 times larger. The basis for this enormous disparity is simple: The larger tax would give an owner second thoughts before expanding his player payroll.
As interim Commissioner Bud Selig said, “The ball is in the players’ court.”
How do they get it out?
The easiest and quickest solution is for near-total surrender. But the players have another and more digestible option: Compromise and meet the owners halfway; agree to a 50 percent tax. Instead of the $800,000 penalty for the scenario described above, the tax would be increased to about $12 million or $13 million.
Please understand, I’m not playing the role of the mediator. That assignment is being filled by Bill Usery Jr., the former secretary of labor, who has sold his services for a pretty penny. No, that’s not correct. It’s not pennies. Usery’s fee is $120,000 a month, to be paid in equal part by both sides.
Initially, it seemed to be an excessive charge. But after seeing him perform Wednesday in Leesburg, I have a better understanding of his costs. He has a big staff that includes a platoon of public-relations schleppers. They are either constantly at his side or guarding the door.
Which reminds me, Usery didn’t tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth during his postgame press conference when he said, “I have asked the owners to withdraw their threat of implementation, and they have agreed to do that.”
According to John Harrington of the Boston Red Sox, chairman of the owners’ bargaining team, it wasn’t Usery who asked for the delay. The request was made by the Players Association.
Whatever, I telephoned an owner late Friday and asked for his reaction to the possibility of a 50 percent compromise.
“It could get us talking,” he said. “But I doubt if we’d go for less than 75 percent.”
Of course, anything is possible. If serious bargaining resumes, as scheduled Friday in Rye Brook, N.Y., the players could link their counterproposal with the issue of salary arbitration. This is the procedure that has helped fuel the salary revolution. Would the owners relent and drop salary arbitration and settle for a cap and/or luxury tax? I doubt it. But I suppose some discussion may be warranted.
Barring another delay, which doesn’t seem likely, the owners will assemble Dec. 15 or 16, probably in Chicago. If the deadlock is not broken, the owners unilaterally will implement their proposals now on the table. Negotiations would continue, but as Harrington emphasized, once the implementation procedure has begun, “You can’t put the yolk back in the egg.”
The owners would proceed promptly with their plans for opening spring training and, if necessary, begin the 1995 season with minor-leaguers. The major-league players also would be invited.
More Top Picks Bathrobes
The next step would be an appeal by the Players Association to the National Labor Relations Board on the charge that the owners have not bargained in good faith. According to David Silverman, the regional director of the NLRB office in New York, approximately “one-third of all cases have merit.”
Which brings up another interesting question. During his Wednesday prattle, Usery three times said both sides are “bargaining in good faith.”
Would he repeat this statement in court?