Following Major League Baseball’s much-maligned “sliding scale” economic proposal to the MLB Players’ Association on Tuesday, per Andy Martino of SNY, an unspecified portion of players “met virtually on Tuesday” to mull over the league’s initial economic offer.
Due to the ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic, MLB operations have been at a standstill since early March. As restrictions begin to be lifted around the country and logistics are calculated, the last hurdle to clear seems to be the highest.
An agreement between the league and the union in March had players set to earn their contracted salaries on a per-game basis in the case of a shortened season.
Last week, MLB was rumored to be preparing a revenue-based financial proposal (50-50 split), but that was rejected by MLBPA union head Tony Clark in short order.
Tuesday’s sliding-scale proposal was met with immediate disapproval from the MLBPA and its members. Late Tuesday night, Jeff Passan of ESPN broke down the approximate monetary effects of the proposal.
While lower-salaried players ($1 million per season and under) would receive anywhere from 72.5 percent to 90 percent of their salary on a per-game basis, players with more lucrative contracts would be taking tremendous hits financially.
Players making over $5 million would lose 60 percent of their per-game take, players who make over $10 million would give up 70 percent, and the upper-tier players who make over $20 million per year would see their salaries reduced by 80 percent.
While this initial proposal is widely regarded as a starting point in negotiations, the MLBPA is understandably miffed at the perceived low-ball offer to get things going.
With a tentative early-July starting date set for a substantially truncated 2020 season, both parties have nary a second to waste on posturing or digging one’s heels in.
We’ll keep you updated with new information as it breaks.
