This might sound familiar: After series of proposals exchanged between Major League Baseball and its players association, the two sides are at an impasse.
The league informed the union that it will not respond to its latest proposal and will not agree to more than 60 games, the MLBPA confirmed Friday. The players association reportedly last proposed 70 games from July 19 through Sept. 30, with players receiving their full prorated salaries.
“Our Executive Board will convene in the near future to determine next steps,” the MLBPA said in its statement.
The Major League Baseball Players Association today released the following statement: pic.twitter.com/XxRDSskBBT— MLBPA Communications (@MLBPA_News) June 19, 2020
MLB Network’s Jon Heyman reported that the players will likely vote by Saturday with two options in front of them: 1) Accept the 60-game offer that MLB commissioner Rob Manfred and MLBPA executive director Tony Clark discussed earlier this week. 2) Let Manfred set a shortened schedule as the March agreement gives him the power to do.
MLB players are expected to vote soon — likely by tomorrow — whether to take the 60-game framework deal Manfred/Clark worked on Monday that includes expanded playoffs and other bonuses or let commissioner Manfred set the schedule for 50-60 as allowed by the March 26 agreement.— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) June 20, 2020
The 60-game proposal reportedly requires the players union to waive its right to file a grievance, whereas falling back on the March agreement seems to leave that option open.
This week’s round of negotiations were initiated by a meeting between Manfred and Clark. The two sides had been in the middle of a similar break in negotiations after Clark had declared in a statement that “further dialogue with the league would be futile.”
On 760 The Score, Cubs player rep Ian Happ said he was optimistic after Manfred and Clark’s meeting.
But in the days after the meeting, Manfred and Clark released conflicting statements.
Manfred said the two had created a “jointly developed framework that we agree could form the basis of an agreement and subject to conversations with our respective constituents.”
Clark and the players association seemed to consider what Manfred called the “framework” of an agreement to be a proposal.
Clark insisted that he “made clear repeatedly in that meeting and after it that there were a number of significant issues with what (Manfred) proposed, in particular the number of games.”
According to Clark, Manfred “invited” a counterproposal.