Major League Baseball's chief labor lawyer, faced with a strike deadline eight days away, indicated yesterday that he was eager to pick up the pace of negotiations for a new agreement with the players. But he may have his own employers to blame for what he sees as the union's foot-dragging approach to the contract talks.þþDiscussing the negotiations on the two key economic issues in the dispute, Rob Manfred told reporters: ÿI am frustrated a little bit. I'd like to get a more active dialogue going on the tax and the revenue sharing, but it takes two parties to make a dialogue.ÿþþManfred disclosed that the management team made a new proposal on revenue sharing Tuesday. He declined to say what the proposal was, but another person familiar with it said the clubs lowered from $282 million to $268 million the amount of local revenue they would take from wealthy clubs and give to poorer clubs.þþWith the union's figure at $235 million, the new proposal left the two sides $33 million apart.þþManfred said club negotiators awaited a response from the union on the revenue-sharing proposal and the one they made on a luxury tax on payrolls last Wednesday.þþHowever, a lawyer familiar with union officials' thinking said the luxury tax continued to be a difficult problem for them, perhaps even more so than it had been, ÿnow that people are out there saying there can't be a deal without a revolutionary change in the salary structure.ÿþþThe lawyer referred to recent comments by owners about the kind of economic system they say baseball has to have for the clubs to be able to operate in a reasonable manner. Donald Fehr, the head of the union, told the players in a memo this week that the clubs' tax proposal would be tantamount to a payroll cap.þþThe lawyer, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that the owners' comments had made the players more confident in the position they adopted in setting Aug. 30 as a strike date. Now, the lawyer added, the players know what the clubs really think.þþTom Hicks of Texas made some of the comments the lawyer referred to. John Moores of San Diego and George Steinbrenner of the Yankees made other kinds of comments recently.þþCommissioner Bud Selig has spoken with all three owners, a person familiar with Selig's actions said, and has told them they will be sanctioned for violating his rule against public comments on labor matters.þþThe clubs' negotiators, meanwhile, continue to wait for responses on their proposals. ÿI'm hoping I'm going to get a response on the revenue-sharing proposal tomorrow,ÿ Manfred said.þþManfred said the clubs made a ÿsubstantial moveÿ toward the union on the amount of local revenue that would be transferred from high-revenue clubs to medium-revenue and low-revenue clubs.þþSteve Fehr, a member of the union's negotiating team, would not say what the clubs' new transfer number was, but he said he ÿwould not necessarily agree with their characterization as substantial.ÿþþBefore the new proposal, the two sides had been $47 million apart, the clubs proposing a transfer of $282 million; the union $235 million. Last year $169 million was moved from wealthier clubs to poorer clubs. þþÿThe proposal we made was an effort to get the core issues moving,ÿ Manfred said in his daily conference call with reporters. þþThroughout the session, Manfred seemed to apply a verbal cattle prod to try to get the union moving on the key issues. He cited other, noncore issues that were important to the players — minimum salary and the benefit plan, for example — and talked about how forthcoming management had been on those and how the two sides had been able to resolve them.þþÿWe have tried to deal with the issues that are of concern to the players,ÿ he said. ÿWe feel we have been very forthcoming on those issues. We'd like to deal with the issues that are important to us as well.ÿþþAs an example of the union's slow pace, Manfred said: ÿWe made a tax proposal last Wednesday night. We haven't got a response from that yet other than a little speech from their committee.ÿþþThat proposal, however, angered union negotiators because they felt they had been led to expect a better proposal. In the proposal, the clubs raised their tax threshold from $100 million to $102 million each year for four years. The tax would hit portions of payrolls over that amount. þþThe union has proposed a three-year tax plan with thresholds of $130 million the first year, $140 million the second year and $150 million the third year. The union also proposed significantly lower tax rates than the clubs have on the table.þþBesides tax rates and thresholds, the fourth year the clubs want poses bargaining problems for the two sides.þþNegotiators have discussed movement on the tax informally, but neither side has formally amended its last proposal.þþManfred said he thought that club negotiators had demonstrated ÿthe flexibility that I believe is necessary to get to a negotiated agreement.ÿ But, he acknowledged, time is growing short.þþÿI'm concerned that the players have made a threat not to continue to play the games,ÿ he said.þþÿI'd like to do everything possible to get an agreement that would prevent them from carrying out that threat.ÿþþ
Source: NY Times
