Officials in baseball's players union took off for Chicago without a new labor agreement yesterday, leaving little doubt that their executive board will set a strike date today.þþNone of the negotiators on either side were available for comment after their three hours of bargaining in New York, but one person who was briefed on the meeting said the clubs made a new proposal on a luxury tax on payrolls.þþRob Manfred, the clubs' chief labor lawyer, opted not to have his daily conference call with reporters to update them on the talks. Union officials did not return calls.þþThe two sides were very close to agreement on debt regulation, said another person who had been briefed, but that issue had no impact on an overall agreement, which people familiar with the union's thinking said last week was necessary to keep the board from setting a strike date.þþA spokesman for Manfred said the two sides discussed the core economic issues yesterday, but he did not acknowledge that a new tax proposal was made. Manfred had indicated to the union that he would put the proposal on the table in a second session Saturday. The second session was not held after the first meeting became heated over elements of the drug programs the two sides had proposed.þþIn the new tax proposal, the clubs were believed to have offered to make a change in the proposed tax rate of 50 percent for some levels of payrolls and raise the threshold of $98 million over which the tax would take effect.þþThe other core economic issue is revenue sharing, but the two sides have gone about as far as they can on that topic without wading into the luxury tax.þþAlthough the clubs say the tax and the sharing of local revenue serve different purposes, the players believe the same teams will be hit by the biggest bills on both, a development that they feel would decrease the teams' desire to sign players to lucrative contracts.þþWithout agreement on those two issues, the board will be left with little choice but to set a strike date. Players have said repeatedly that they do not want to strike, but they also do not want to go into the off-season without an agreement.þþAlthough the clubs have said they would not lock out the players or unilaterally put new work rules into effect through the season and postseason, they have not made that same pledge about the off-season. Players, familiar with tactics used by the National Basketball Association in that league's off-season, expect the owners would act immediately after the World Series.þþPlayer representatives, who make up the executive board, and union officials also know from experience that if they do not set a strike date, at least some people on the owners' side will see that as a sign of weakness and negotiate accordingly, meaning they could take a more hard-line position.þþThe board is expected to select a date sometime in the last 10 days of August. In 1994, the board met on July 28 and set Aug. 12 as the target for a strike. That turned out to be the day the players walked out, beginning a strike that lasted into the following April.þþSetting a strike date, on the other hand, would not mean that the players would automatically strike. The date would initially serve as a bargaining deadline, giving the negotiators a real date by which they would need to work out an agreement. The old agreement expired Nov. 7, but the two sides have not faced any real deadline.þþThe pending union board meeting served as an impetus for the two sides to try to make a deal, but they fell well short. They plan to resume bargaining tomorrow.þþ
Source: NY Times
