ptatc

I thought someone posted a source earlier stating MLB players get 47% of revenues.

I'm surprised the union rejected the robo umps. Unless it is just a bargaining chip.

It's easier to control a damp ball when you lick the fingers. Not a wet ball like in the rain.

I would bet most owners had businesses prior to buying into the legal monopoly.

Good PR.

I believe Carlton Fisk and Million Dollar Floyd Bannister were in this category as well.

Maybe it's past the limit of his revenues?

Same here. She only goes from mid-May to August. This includes Bears games.

I agree. I like the outdoor environment for sports. Even the 10 degree Bears games.

Some are simple. The MLB one is not. If the owners lockout the employees. Odds are it has already started with animosity and won't be simple.

I don't think this is totally true. The other sports aren't partnering with the players, they dominate them. MLB is the only league without a true hard salary cap and the only one with guaranteed contracts. The other unions aren't as strong which is why there is no labor issues. If the MLBPA agreed to a hard salary cap and no guaranteed contracts, I'll bet the owners would run to sign that deal.

Ok. So back to his statement. He said this would all end if the owners agreed to continue with the terms of the last CBA. You just listed even more things that the players wanted. So again, i don't think the players would have agreed to play under the previous CBA terms.

An informal meeting between the 2 lead negotiators.

Could be. Can't say I follow all of them. Did they have a lock out as in this situation?

From listening to the negotiations, I don't think this is correct. I think the players are holding fast to increasing the pay for the younger, pre-arb players.

Of course they don't all end in a strike or lockout. A strike authorization isn't a strike. It's a vote by the union members to authorize the union leaders to call a strike. The union leaders use this authorization as a bargaining chip showing the union resolve and he possibility of a strike. Everything you say about Manfred is true. I'm just saying that every collective bargaining negotiation has the same person saying the same things. He hasn't failed yet. If he gets the players to agree to a deal that the owners think is acceptable, he succeeded in his job. If the players get too many concessions from the owners then he fails.

Authorizing a strike is just that. It gives the union leaders the permission from the union to strike if they decide to. We've never actually gone on strike. It's just a bargaining tool for the union leaders. The playbook is the same, just depends on how for each side decides to take it. If it goes long enough you'll hear about the union voting to authorize a strike, doesn't mean it will happen but it gives the union leaders more bargaining power.

Again, I would like to say it's only him but in all of the negotiations I've been in, that's the playbook. For us, it always came down to voting to authorize a strike, force more negotiations, then settle for what we can get. Everytime. All 6 of them.

They never start early. It just the way it works. It's always the manufactured deadline to get people seriously negotiating. Nothing is seriously negotiated until the last minute. Again, the irrationality of negotiations.

Unfortunately when you get to collective bargaining, rational people become irrational and it becomes only about getting something from the other side. Having been involved in a number of them on both sides, it's all about what you can get. It all depends on how long and how far the employees/players want to push it. This is why we all knew that with Boras and his players leading the union this time around it was going to last awhile.

Agreed. It's a collective bargaining where both sides are trying to get al they can. Just get back to playing baseball.

Lies, Lies. He is a billionaire owner.

Goes where it always does when Jack gets rolling. People that own companies or have money are evil and they should give their money to others who don't have as much money.

While it is on the table, it won't happen until the union agrees to a hard cap like the other leagues have. That's when you need to show the books and show the revenue to find that split. That is a bargaining chip the owners have to get the hard cap. The revenue is almost there anyway. Someone stated earlier that the players get 47% of the revenue. That's pretty good for about 20% of the workforce.

When unions are involved there is no such things. It's what can be collectively bargained. There is no right and wrong, no black and white. It's what can be agreed upon. If it can't be agreed upon, it's what the mediator or arbiter can force them to agreed to.