Can MLB, union get together on a blueprint for restarting?
In this Feb. 8, 2019, file photo, Rob Manfred, commissioner of Major League Baseball, speaks during a news conference at owners meetings in Orlando, Fla. Credit: AP/John Raoux
At some point in the coming week, Major League Baseball will submit a return-to-play blueprint to the Players Association for the union’s approval, a critical step toward getting the sport back on the field again.
Don’t take that to mean games are right around the corner, though. Aside from dealing directly with the COVID-19 outbreak itself, this is the most daunting part. Negotiating the terms of a baseball restart, as much as everyone says how badly they want it, is shaping up to be as complicated a bargaining session as the sport has ever seen.
The two sides were applauded on March 26 when commissioner Rob Manfred and union chief Tony Clark were able to craft an operating agreement for their industry during an unprecedented crisis. The biggest takeaways? The players received credit for a full year’s service time, even if there is no season, as well as a $170 million advance on salaries, given that all contracts were suspended once President Trump declared a national emergency.
So what has happened since? MLB is looking for payback.
We’ve already seen the umpires accept a 30% salary reduction, along with other concessions, to be on board for the 2020 season, if there is one. And on Friday, MLB and the Players Association agreed to chop next month’s amateur draft from its usual 40 rounds to five, a cost-slashing measure that will save the teams roughly $30 million in signing bonuses.
This stopped being about baseball as soon as games started getting wiped out. It’s an economics discussion now, brought on by a global pandemic, and staging any sport in this hazardous environment is a challenge unlike anything this generation has seen.
“There’s nothing that’s easy,” Yankees president Randy Levine said this past week.
Just some hard decisions that need to be made by virtue of the fact that they’re less worse than the others.
As difficult as it may be, I do believe that MLB and the Players Association can agree on a workable course to resume this season. My skepticism lies in the execution of that plan in our current COVID-19 landscape. What looks feasible on paper often is ripped to shreds by reality’s harsh claws.
With that in mind, here’s a snapshot of what needs to be figured out this week, along with the problems associated with these items.
With MLB targeting June for a potential spring training 2.0 and July 4 as a possible Opening Day, an agreement doesn’t have to come together overnight. But they’ll probably need at least another week or so to get a better read on whether we’re beating back the virus enough to resume the season, which leads us to the first concern.
Passing grade on tests? Everyone agrees that MLB is going to require quick access to hundreds of COVID-19 tests, versions to both identify active cases as well as the existence of antibodies, with the latter suggesting a possible (but not proven) immunity. The NBA said this past week that it will test only asymptomatic players in areas that already had sufficient testing resources for essential personnel, a policy sensitive to the March blowback for the league's access to tests that were scarce at the time.
The Korean Baseball Organization, which started play Tuesday, maintains the need to test players only if they show COVID-19 symptoms, as their players are closely monitored by morning temperature scans and upon entrance to the stadiums. MLB probably could do the same after first doing league-wide tests for all team personnel, umpires and other ballpark staffers when spring training begins,. It’s not an airtight system, but testing more than 1,600 baseball employees, even on a regular weekly basis, doesn’t seem possible.
What about the contracts? Clark insists that the 2020 terms for player compensation already were negotiated in March: prorated salaries based on the number of games in a truncated season. But the owners will point to a clause in the same agreement that calls for more negotiation if the games are played without fans (i.e., minus key revenue), as will surely be the case. Because teams are getting crushed financially with no gate revenue, many owners probably would choose not to resume the season rather than pay players on a prorated basis with empty stadiums. Perhaps one way around this is salary deferrals, but the money problem is a thorny issue. From a PR perspective, the players are in a tough spot. It’s going to take some revolutionary thinking to check this box.
Safe at home? After early conversations about “bubble” set-ups anchored in Arizona, with other plans stretching to include Florida and even Texas, the most recent discussions have centered around the home ballparks for spring training and a shortened regular season of 80 to 100 games. Instrumental to that idea would be realigning teams by geography to limit travel, but that doesn’t solve all the problems. Yes, players are in favor of staying in their own homes rather than spending five months quarantined in the same hotel, but the hot zones may keep changing, and what seems safe now could be a different story in a few weeks. With the NBA now focusing on its own potential “bubble” locations, MLB also might be forced to narrow its range to a grouping of ballparks rather than using all 30. Players are on record as not wanting the “bubble,” but is the virus going to allow for any other alternatives?
David Lennon is an award-winning columnist, a voter for baseball's Hall of Fame and has covered six no-hitters, including two perfect games.
