Let's refocus again...

Let's refocus again...

Post by Randy Peppl » Sat, 03 Mar 1990 03:57:19


        Could someone consisely restate what the major stumbling blocks
        are at the moment in this now-getting-to-be-very-old lockout
        situation?  Is arbitration the only big roadblock?
--
_________________                              _
| Randy Peppler |______________               / \        x
| Illinois State Water Survey |       ________| |________|____________Illinois

 
 
 

Let's refocus again...

Post by Mark J. Rineha » Sat, 03 Mar 1990 07:01:45

Quote:

>    Could someone consisely restate what the major stumbling blocks
>    are at the moment in this now-getting-to-be-very-old lockout
>    situation?  Is arbitration the only big roadblock?

After listening to David Cone, Mets Player Rep, yes, the only problem
is the players wish to be able to go to arbitration after 2 years and
the owners wish that option to remain at the current 3 years of
service. A total crock of shit on BOTH sides if you ask me. For the
sake of 1 year, both players and management have acted like complete
***s, and are jeopardizing the entire season. I have no sympathy
for either side. They deserve each other. Frankly, I'm fast coming to
the conclusion that I couldn't care less about this season - something
I never thought I'd say about major league baseball. As a fan, I can
only take so much.

mark

 
 
 

Let's refocus again...

Post by Borges » Sat, 03 Mar 1990 21:29:49

Quote:

>    Could someone consisely restate what the major stumbling blocks
>    are at the moment in this now-getting-to-be-very-old lockout
>    situation?  Is arbitration the only big roadblock?

Ostensibly, arbitration is the main road block.  It appears now, though,
that the real stumbling blocks are ego and pride.  From what I've seen
and heard, the word "acrimony" is being used to describe the interraction
between Fehr and the owners these days.

It's obvious to me that these people cannot and will not solve their own
problems without some sort of outside pressure to get a settlement.  It
appears that the next great hope is that the players start breaking rank
and demand a settlement.  If that doesn't happen, then the networks need
to put some sort of financial pressure on the owners.  I really don't know
what else will work.  Negotiation and compromise don't seem to be working
too well.

                                                                brett

 
 
 

Let's refocus again...

Post by Randy Peppl » Sun, 04 Mar 1990 00:53:11

Quote:


>>        Could someone consisely restate what the major stumbling blocks
>>        are at the moment in this now-getting-to-be-very-old lockout
>>        situation?  Is arbitration the only big roadblock?

>Ostensibly, arbitration is the main road block.  It appears now, though,
>that the real stumbling blocks are ego and pride.  From what I've seen
>and heard, the word "acrimony" is being used to describe the interraction
>between Fehr and the owners these days.

>It's obvious to me that these people cannot and will not solve their own
>problems without some sort of outside pressure to get a settlement.  It
>appears that the next great hope is that the players start breaking rank
>and demand a settlement.  If that doesn't happen, then the networks need
>to put some sort of financial pressure on the owners.  I really don't know
>what else will work.  Negotiation and compromise don't seem to be working
>too well.

        For what it's worth, Congress got involved yesterday, passing
        a resolution hoping for a speedy end to the dispute, because
        of the "hardship" it causes.  I would like to see the two
        negotiators tarred-and-feathered after this is over.  If it's
        any consolation, there's players out there like Carlton Fisk
        who think the whole thing is nonsense and want the dispute to
        end...

        I feel most sorry for the old folks down in Florida and Arizona
        who live for the month of March...

        Where is Bart when you need him...

--
_________________                              _
| Randy Peppler |______________               / \        x
| Illinois State Water Survey |       ________| |________|____________Illinois

 
 
 

Let's refocus again...

Post by Scott Barm » Sun, 04 Mar 1990 01:13:03

Quote:

>    Could someone consisely restate what the major stumbling blocks
>    are at the moment in this now-getting-to-be-very-old lockout
>    situation?  Is arbitration the only big roadblock?

According to the local (NYC) tabloids, here are the issues that are
blocking a settlement:

1) ARBITRATION - Now that the owners do not want to drastically change
the economics of the sport, they want to somehow limit arbitatration.
According to the last news conference, the owners want to keep status
quo on the amount of minimum MLB service before allowing a player to go
to arbitration and the players want it rolled back to pre-1985 level of
two years.  As a compomise, the owners are willing to offer a
redifinition of the "year".  Currently, 172 days of MLB service counts
as a year and have "suggested" cutting that back up to 10%.  Owners
have abandoned a cap on the limit of a arbitration award at 75% over
the player's previous salary.

2) ROSTERS - As part of the 1985 "give backs" the roster sizes were
reduced to 24 players.  The players want it back to 25, the owners want
status quo.  No movement on either side.

3) MINIMUM SALARIES - The current minimum salary is $68,000 per year (I
knew I went into the wrong profession :-).  The owners are willing to
raise the minimum but want to raise it on a graduated scale (the last I
heard was $80,000 for first year players, $100,000 for second, $115,000
for all others).  The players want an across the board minimum of
$125,000--but the impressions are the players will agree to a graduated
scale if the numbers were higher.

4) PENSIONS - The owners contributed $34 million to the players pension
fund and have agreed to contribute $42 million.  Basing the numbers on
the TV revenues, the $42 million is a roll back (percentage wise).  The
players want status quo on a percentage bases which increases the
payment to near $50 million a year.  Additionally, there is a drive for
the addition of pension monies for pre-1960 ball players (those not in
the current pension system).  This could be tabled as it has been every
year since the pension issue has been one.

That's the story... I hope it can end soon!  Now that I'm home again,
I would hate to have to miss the season because these morons can't
decide how to cut up this overstuffed pie.

--
scott barman

uucp:     {philabs, ge-dab, crdgw1}!nbc1!scott

 
 
 

Let's refocus again...

Post by LASCOLA ROBERT J » Tue, 06 Mar 1990 11:22:12

Quote:

>                 Or, and this is my suggestion, they could flip
>a coin on this one point.  This is faster, cheaper, unbiased, and
>reasonably "unacrimonious."  It is also not without precedent.  Marge
>Schott settled a contract dispute with one of the Reds this way
>(although I can't remember the player).  

>Just a thought.

I think that the coin flip was between Marge and Kal Daniels.  I only remember
this because I was pissed off at Schott for offering and Daniels for accepting
(even though he got lucky and won).  The message I got from her was, "I really
could pay you what you want - I obviously don't really care if I want to
settle it this way.  But I'm such a tightwad that I'm not going to give you
what you want outright, just to see if you'll back down and I get to keep a
little more money."  It's exactly this kind of power-play mentality that is
keeping agreements from being reached.  <ggrrrrrr...>

Quote:
>PLAY BALL!!

Damn straight.


Go Buffalo Bisons!  (The next NL team?)