MLB to begin? The debate begins on the internet about pay

Major League Baseball is set to present a proposal to start the season, but there is plenty of debate surrounding how MLB will pay the players.

In the absence of Major League Baseball competition, the documentation of the endless rumors and vaguely attributed comments about the start of the 2020 season continues. As has been widely been reported, apparently MLB will present their players union with a proposal May 12 about opening the season sometime soon – maybe around the Fourth of July.

It is widely expected, as a matter of ordinary business practice, that the owners will suggest player pay reduction since the games – maybe 80 of them – will be played, at least to start, in front of TV cameras only.

Eighth grade graduates here can also likely “do the math” and conclude this season, if it starts, will have fewer than 50 percent of the games ordinarily played. Anyone who has made a business budget thus understands an impetus to cut “worker salaries.”

Additionally, there is that little complicating matter of approximately 22 percent of the working-age population being out of work in the US, either involuntarily or because they’ve just given up.

No worries: Let the great debate begin about cutting the salaries of young men who will make and have made already six-to-eight figure salaries.

An early contributor to the discussion was Newark Star-Ledger reporter Bob Klapisch, who tweeted May 10, “Talked to one MLB executive who’s less than optimistic about MLB’s return if owners insist on pay-cuts from the union. He doubts players will yield. ‘I could easily see the whole thing falling apart and no baseball until next year.’”

Thanks for being specific about your source, Bob. Yeah, yeah, I know….

Eight weeks into the Great COVID-19 Quarantine most MLB fans likely have definite ideas about MLB players refusing pay cuts to play this season, even understanding they’ll probably be poked and prodded incessantly for their own protection.

The first thought that comes to mind, obviously, is that refusing to play half a season (when a player doesn’t even have to worry about those pesky kids who want autographs) is not likely to be popular.

And those who responded to Klapisch verified this:

1.       “Both sides better be careful because people are getting used to no sports.”

2.       “Not many people will sympathize with the players here. It’s a bad look for them.”

3.       “The union members won’t agree to be paid on a pro rata basis? The greed is palpable.”

4.       “Well then players get no money at all if they don’t play. Plenty of billion dollar businesses have cut employee salaries back or furloughed them, players need to realize that. Owners r rich, but they can’t pay players with minimal revenue coming in, its how things work”

5.       “Yeah ok, since money magically grows on the money tree….”

However, some in the Twittersphere sided with the owners, most of them billionaires. (The last publicly traded team was the Cleveland Indians. I know this because I was a shareholder. I made very little before Mr. Jacobs sold the team.)

Some stand with the owners because, well, it’s the USA. You say “black”; I say “white.”

Someone whose Twitter feed is simply designated “Mark” seemed to be committed to the debate about Klapisch’s “news,” and made several comments, among them: “The owners could pay the players for 100 years and never run out of money. Don’t side with rich people, ever,” and “Do you know how rich owners are? They aren’t entitled to profits. Literally the only thing they contribute is money, so if there are financial losses, they should absorb them. When a team is sold for a billion dollar profit, the players don’t get a cut of that.”

A quick reply to the second comment was: “Players get huge contracts, you don’t get that without someone backing it up. You need revenue in to have money going out.”

Anyway, you get the idea. The secondary idea is – perhaps not so obviously – there is enormous interest in at least watching baseball on TV this year. A deal needs to be done.

The sticking point beyond money, which no one is discussing since we’ve all decided to take our chances with COVID-19 is: What happens when one MLB player tests positive for this pandemic’s infection after play begins?