MLB owners and the Players Association are preparing for a long lockout, but it is up to both sides to agree to a new CBA.
In Major League Baseball, the current Collective Bargaining Agreement expires December 1. The owners and the Players Association have until then to agree to a new CBA to avoid a work stoppage, but at this point, a lockout is inevitable. The real question on the minds of anyone who cares about baseball in America is whether the two sides can reach a new CBA in time for a full 2027 season.
Even though the current deal is about to expire, we are actually quite early in negotiations. The owners and the players are quite far apart, and neither has made much effort to work together in their previous proposals. There are some clear reasons why each side may or may not be willing to sacrifice official games in the name of finance. The primary issue is that owners are making their biggest push in decades for a salary cap, which is a nonstarter for the players.
While a firm limit on payroll is the dark cloud hanging over negotiations, it is not the only thing lawyers will discuss. We could see changes to the schedule, and more consequentially, changes to amateur acquisition. Those are in addition to the usual topics of league minimum salaries and how players earlier in their careers can make more money.
The Owners’ Position
Any American sports fan knows owners always want a salary cap. It is a surefire way of limiting salaries, and therefore keeping more money in their billionaire pockets. But given the dominance of the Los Angeles Dodgers this decade regarding wins on the field and in free agency, the owners think public sentiment is in their favor to install a cap. They claim a cap is needed for competitive balance, but if they really believed that they would propose some other ways to achieve balance.
The owners want a hard cap and are basing all their other proposals on that premise, but it is unclear how serious they are about it. If their position is salary cap or bust, there will be no CBA and therefore no 2027 season. That is an obvious nuclear option and one they have not explored in a very long time. For reference, many current players were not alive the last time some MLB games were cancelled. But league revenues have grown so much in the last 30 years that perhaps they can stomach missing a whole season. In that case, owners would continue the PR battle and blame players for not accepting something most other leagues have.
But Commissioner Rob Manfred, who represents the owners, has some other considerations of his own. He has said he will retire in a few years, and I doubt he wants his final legacy to be The Man Who Cancelled Baseball rather than being known for recent rule changes. When the 1994 World Series was cancelled, it took years for the league to recover all the fans who felt betrayed. Plus, Manfred wants a completely new TV deal when the rights come up again, and he would have a hard time selling them if there are no recent games to show as evidence of ratings. Those two factors could push the league to give up on a salary cap and effectively continue the current system.
The Players’ Position
As long as the union has existed, the Players Association has been adamantly opposed to a salary cap. Even though caps go up over time, salaries don’t increase at the same rate under a cap compared to an uncapped system. If the owners keep pushing for a cap, the players will buckle down and prepare for a long lockout. They will never accept a salary cap and are willing to lose games to avoid one.
But since there are other issues at hand, the players should at least consider what would happen if they accepted a salary cap. Since that is the biggest possible concession, the union could probably get everything else they want in the CBA. The owners would likely give up their pursuit of an international amateur draft. In the same vein, bonus pools for amateurs could go up. Just like with the pre-arbitration bonus pool young players can make more money since free agents will have less to earn.
The dream scenario for the union would be more money for every type of player, but they won’t get everything they want, just as the owners won’t. So, accepting some limits on free agency would allow them to get most of their other priorities. Players might be able to reach free agency sooner, and/or the arbitration system could be more transparent. There are ways for both sides to get what they want, if they are willing to give up what they want the most.
Featured Articles
Featured Writers
