FootyChatter.com

MLBPA Uncertainty Recent drama at baseball's players union will impact the sport's expected labor war. AP Photo / Richard Drew Change is coming to the Major League Baseball Players Association, the most famous sports union in the world. Tony Clark, the union’s executive director for more than 12 years, stepped down last month after an internal investigation revealed he had an inappropriate relationship with his sister-in-law, a union employee. Advertisement Going forward, smart choices behind the scenes could strengthen players’ positions during perhaps the most crucial negotiation in the union’s history. Missteps in transition, however, could leave a once revered union flailing at a time when MLB’s owners smell weakness. Players and owners are expected to start negotiating the next five-year labor deal next month, and a lockout is likely to follow in December. Two processes could influence some of the union’s direction. Soon, the legal firm Morrison Foerster is expected to wrap up its internal investigation of the union, according to people briefed on that process who were not authorized to speak publicly. The firm could recommend staffing and structural changes beyond the top job. How much of that review the union will publicize isn’t known, but the organization’s approach to nepotism figures to be one key topic. The union also is waiting to learn whether prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York will indict any of its officials, past or present. A federal investigation into Clark’s handling of union finances is what prompted baseball players to hire outside counsel in the first place. But with Clark gone, the MLBPA already has an opportunity to act differently. Labor unions often take defensive postures, with difficult internal politics for any leader to navigate. But even in that context, Clark’s MLBPA had a deliberate, sometimes plodding approach to decision-making, union sources who were not authorized to speak publicly said. In public relations, the union sometimes appeared scared of its own shadow, more worried about avoiding missteps, or perhaps even job preservation for union staff, than anything else. “I have to be [guarded], ” Clark told The Athletic in 2022. “Because when I speak, I don’t represent myself. I represent our members first and foremost. ” Advertisement Clark became hardened over time. Knives were often out, and his management style sometimes reflected a level of distrust. He was hired in 2013 in a hurried process to replace the late Michael Weiner, and Clark’s first negotiation with the owners, in 2016, didn’t go well. Players and agents subsequently asked him to beef up his negotiating crew — with suggestions that if he did not, he wouldn’t receive a second chance. The lawyer Clark hired to quell his base was Bruce Meyer, who is now the MLBPA’s interim boss. Players started to get better results in bargaining: the 2022-26 deal is generally regarded as a win for players. But the trouble for Clark kept coming. Two years ago, some players and agents tried to stage a coup. Federal investigators then turned their attention to the MLBPA last year. In some ways, Clark’s exit is a weight lifted. The possibility the union’s leader could be indicted in the middle of bargaining would have been an elephant in the room. Clark achieved much as executive director. He grew the organization’s financial might — something that helps in collective bargaining — and, in a landmark decision, he invited minor leaguers to join major leaguers inside the union in 2022. But when one voice leads any organization for a long time, some processes are naturally going to deserve fresh eyes. Clark’s time atop the union began even before Manfred became commissioner. Some inside the MLBPA hope that players will recalibrate around the idea the union is theirs — not Clark’s or anyone else’s. Meyer, 64, is leading the organization, but the top job is really being divided into two roles, in a process that’s still unfolding. Outside of bargaining, much of the day-to-day oversight that Clark provided will be in the hands of Matt Nussbaum, a 47-year-old lawyer who was previously the union’s general counsel and is now its interim deputy director. Advertisement Meyer’s specialty is collective bargaining. The pressure on him is high, and the task is as large as ever. Owners are preparing a push for a salary cap, a change baseball players have long fought against. Regular-season games in 2027 will be in jeopardy if the sides can’t reach a deal by that March. Nussbaum’s promotion alongside Meyer’s is an acknowledgment of just how important bargaining is. Some union sources believe Clark tried to expand the union’s other interests too fast, that the allure of turning the MLBPA into a business behemoth led to poor decision-making. For instance: Federal investigators have reviewed a licensing business the MLBPA co-founded with other sports unions, One Team Partners, as part of its probe. The National Football League Players Association owns the largest share of One Team. Heather Mc Phee, a former lawyer for the football players’ union, alleged in a lawsuit that after the NFLPA brought in outside counsel to review One Team, Clark participated in a pressure campaign to shut down the inquiry. The NFLPA, which is a defendant in Mc Phee’s lawsuit, and attorneys for Mc Phee and Clark declined comment. “One Team and its employees are not, and have never been, targets of the Eastern District of New York’s investigation and have been fully cooperative, ” One Team said in a statement. “One Team remains unwavering in its commitment to maximizing value for its partners and conducting its business with the highest standards of integrity and accountability. ” One Team has provided a major windfall to baseball players, including $44. 5 million in licensing fees for 2024. Yet the MLBPA also already had a licensing arm prior to creating One Team, called Players Inc. , which probably could have brokered at least similar deals. One Team’s advantage is that it handles licensing for multiple unions, which creates opportunities of scale. Advertisement But the complexities of setting up a for-profit business that is owned by multiple labor unions — and therefore is subject to labor-law considerations as well — has brought public and internal scrutiny. The FBI has also looked into how the union spent money on a different for-profit venture, Players Way, that was supposed to help cultivate youth baseball. The union’s efforts with Players Way and One Team leave questions as to whether Clark and players would have been better served more narrowly focusing on the union’s age-old tasks of bargaining and protecting players. Meyer said recently that bargaining has always been the union’s top priority. “At the end of the day, bargaining is the most important thing, ” he said. “It’s always been the most important thing. Our team that’s been preparing for that for years remains in place. It’s not going to affect bargaining in any respect. ” The shortest answer is “probably not much, ” because Meyer’s core economic beliefs look the same as Clark’s, and Meyer was already set to lead the negotiation. Like Clark and every other MLBPA leader before him, Meyer believes a cap would be bad for players. The longer answer: keep an eye on a few areas of operation. A weaker union could ultimately lead to acquiescence, if players are less willing to fight on a given topic than they might have been otherwise. So far, players are projecting strength. Brent Rooker, the Athletics slugger, said players are prepared to miss games to prevent a cap. “It’s just inherently bad for players, it’s bad for the sport, it’s bad for competition, it’s bad for the league, ” Rooker said. “It would set us back in terms of things that we have gained over the past several years. It doesn’t accomplish the things that it is supposed to accomplish, and I think overall, would just be a loss for the league, for teams and for players. Advertisement “We know what to expect, and we know where we stand on it, and we know how firm and committed we are. So we’re ready to take that head on. ” But it will be hard to judge too much until crunch time, when paychecks are on the line. Will Meyer and Nussbaum and the rest of the PA be able to rally players the way Clark once could? A former player with a large frame and dramatic beard, Clark had a presence and a certain cachet, even as he seemed increasingly compromised. One veteran of sports unions noted by phone recently that unions are first and last about their own internal politics. Player support is the key that unlocks everything, just as owner support is vital to Manfred and his lead negotiator, Dan Halem. Players can’t make big changes, or ward off proposals they do not want, if membership is in disarray. (Unity is relative in labor contexts: a group of 1, 200 or so players across the 40-man rosters of 30 teams is never going to have a unanimous position. ) The union has other staffers who have played, including former pitchers Kevin Slowey and Andrew Miller. But big leaguers have also found respect for other types of leaders before. Clark is the only MLBPA executive director who himself took the field. The union’s most famous director, Marvin Miller, was an economist. Clark’s two immediate predecessors, Weiner and Don Fehr, both were trained as lawyers. In fact, for much of Clark’s tenure, he was criticized for lacking precisely the expertise that lawyers such as Meyer and Nussbaum carry. In the last couple of years, the MLBPA realized it wasn’t doing enough in its efforts to make agents feel like key stakeholders. Weiner was revered for the way he made agents feel connected and heard. That work will continue to be crucial, because agents directly influence player opinion. What Manfred and owners do could also affect player positions, to some extent. Advertisement The league could feel it will never have a better time than now to push through what it wants. The rub is that no singular issue has been more galvanizing to players historically than fighting against a cap. In its attempt to pounce, the league could wind up breathing new life into the players. A lockout is still just as likely. MLB has made clear that if there is no deal in place come the expiration of the current one — at 11: 59 p. m. ET on Dec. 1 — then the owners probably will shut down the sport. And there’s just no reason to believe the sides will have a deal in place by that time. In fact, any resolution before March 2027 would be a surprise. The last deal got done in March 2022, and this negotiation might be tougher. It’s not a legal requirement for MLB to lock out players. The league has argued that a lockout will actually help the process along, and that an offseason lockout differs from one that costs regular-season games. The player argument is that a lockout at any point is a weapon, a pressure tactic. One likely argument from management will go like this: Meyer, a hard-nosed litigator, will take any negotiation until the last possible minute regardless of what owners propose, and so what choice do owners have but to lock out the players? The implication would be that if someone else had taken Clark’s job, someone from the outside with a different approach, the whole process could look different. Meyer has said over time that the league only wants player leadership to be more willing to cater to owner demands. Conversely, on both sides of the aisle, there’s a sense that individual leadership personalities matter less than the public might think. The issues themselves — the math, the money — usually provide the answers. Advertisement And the constituents are supposed to hold the power. Thirty owners will tell Manfred what to do, and 38 players will do the same for Meyer, based on whatever is slid across the table. Why 38 players? The group that votes on whether to ratify a new CBA includes one player rep from each of the 30 teams, plus eight members of the “executive subcommittee, ” a unit elected by players that works closely with union staff. The 30 player reps play a huge role for the MLBPA, and how well they communicate with their respective groups is hard for the public to see, but crucial to the union’s success. Some sources say there was variability in player rep communication during the 2021-22 lockout. “When players don’t have transparency and don’t actually fully understand what’s going on, and why the subcommittee is voting yes or no, ” said Chris Bassitt of the Baltimore Orioles, a current subcommittee member, “you run into issues and scenarios where players are not comfortable with certain situations because they’re just uninformed. ” Clark’s exit was something of a fire drill that, in a way, simulated the intensity of what’s to come in bargaining. Two weeks ago, players had to quickly get together on calls and decide on his replacement while the sporting world waited. “I’ve actually been very encouraged by the players, ” one union official said. “I think ultimately it just goes back to them, and they are very much together. We’re not telling them what they want. ” Spot the pattern. Connect the terms Find the hidden link between sports terms Play today's puzzle Evan Drellich is a senior writer for The Athletic, covering baseball. He’s the author of the book Winning Fixes Everything: How Baseball’s Brightest Minds Created Sports’ Biggest Mess. Follow Evan on Twitter @Evan Drellich