View Single Post
11-16-2012, 11:21 PM
Bob b smith
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,827
vCash: 500
Marvin Miller, Fehr's predecessor at the MLBPA, found him too moderate:

"Miller never hesitated to criticize the union’s stance on issues or suggest that he would not have agreed to positions taken by Fehr. Examples include revenue sharing and the Competitive Balance Tax, both of which the union agreed to during Fehr’s reign. Miller opined that those items were an end-around on the issue of a salary cap, which, under his leadership, the union had always adamantly opposed. Miller
argued that those items effectively act as a drag on player salaries, especially when teams do not spend their revenue sharing receipts on Major League payroll." (p. 50-51)

The time to prepare the negotiations and to fix the PA in disarray influenced the decision to exercise the option on the last year of the last CBA:

"Although players had expressed a number of concerns with the existing CBA, especially the provision that required them to escrow a portion of their paychecks in the event league revenues fell short of estimations,... Fehr convinced the players to roll the existing CBA over for an additional year while he helped the union get its house in order...

Fehr wanted to familiarize himself with the nuances of the sport, the mindset of the players, their concerns about the existing CBA, and to prepare a strategy for negotiating with the owners. Thus, Fehr’s approach seemed to say that it was better to live with the concerns of the existing CBA then to immediately enter into negotiations on a new agreement unprepared" (p. 62)

Last edited by Bob b smith: 11-16-2012 at 11:52 PM.
Bob b smith is offline   Reply With Quote