With under a week until the season starts and with three seasons remaining on the 2022-26 collective bargaining agreement, there’s been an atypical amount of drama pertaining to the MLB Players Association this week. Monday evening, reports emerged that a contingent of players has voiced a desire for executive director Tony Clark to replace deputy director Bruce Meyer, swapping him out for 33-year-old lawyer Harry Marino, the former head of Advocates For Minor Leaguers who negotiated the sport’s first minor league collective bargaining agreement alongside Meyer.
As one would expect, there are various lenses through which the current drama is being viewed. Reporting from Jeff Passan of ESPN, from Bob Nightengale of USA Today and from Evan Drellich and Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic offer various glimpses at a layered, complex and — to some degree — contentious situation that could have historic ramifications on the state of labor within Major League Baseball. Chandler Rome of The Athletic, meanwhile, has published an exhaustive Q&A with Astros player rep and MLBPA executive subcommittee member Lance McCullers Jr. MLBTR readers seeking to get a full grasp of the current state of affairs are encouraged to read all of these pieces in full so as to best formulate an opinion on the matter, but some of the key takeaways are as follows.
Passan broadly suggests that Marino has worked to rally a contingent of players — primarily minor leaguers, whom he knows from his time working to unionize Minor League Baseball — to gain momentum toward a change in power. The now-former MLBPA counsel — Marino left the union last summer after brokering the minor league CBA — has also spent the spring conducting secret meetings with players who are their teams’ union representatives, per Passan. Marino has deliberately avoided clients of the Boras Corporation, Passan adds, wary of the perception that Scott Boras has a heavy influence over the union — Meyer specifically. (Meyer has vehemently denied any such allegations in the past.)
Marino himself refuted the notion that he’s orchestrated a coup attempt within the ranks of the MLBPA. In a statement to Passan, he laid out that players to whom he’s spoken want to know how their union dues are being spent and that they want a new direction for collective bargaining, while also conceding that there’s some understandable skepticism regarding his youth, experience and general unknown background among big leaguers who didn’t work with him during his efforts to establish the minor league union.
Marino’s critics, according to Passan, suggest Marino has ties to agencies in the same manner he alleges to be the case with Meyer/Boras — CAA and WME — and that they’re fearful he could be more amenable to a salary cap than prior union leaders, who’ve considered the issue a strict nonstarter. Others — particularly those whose teams were excluded from Marino’s series of meetings because of his trepidation regarding Boras — feel blindsided by his efforts and think they run counter to the unity he’s preached.
Discontent regarding Meyer isn’t necessarily new, however. Drellich and Rosenthal report there have been multiple requests to make a change over the years — the preference for Marino is simply the latest among them. That decision ultimately comes down to Clark, a fact that has rankled some members of the union. The Athletic’s report wonders whether frustration over Clark’s ostensible decision to side with Meyer despite an apparent majority in favor of implementing a change could lead to a vote on Clark’s status as the union’s executive director.
That’s far from a certainty. For one, Passan notes that Clark is well liked among players on a personal level — even among those who don’t always agree with the union’s direction. Moreover, there’s on-record support from multiple prominent union voices for Clark. In his Q&A with Rome, McCullers makes clear that he “absolutely [has] faith” in Clark and that many union members share his stance. The MLBPA just extended Clark’s contract by five years back in 2022. McCullers also praised the job Meyer has done, saying the MLBPA is in a “much better place” now than when Meyer was hired. He acknowledged that the deputy director’s tenure is up in the air at the moment but doubled down that the decision is Clark’s to make.
Of course, as many readers are aware, McCullers is a client of the Boras Corporation. That might prompt skeptics to be dismissive of the right-hander’s support for Clark and Meyer. But Passan also spoke to former MLBPA executive subcommittee member Andrew Miller — a client of Frontline Athlete Management — who echoed McCullers’ sentiments that he’s never seen or experienced anything that’d cause him to lend credence to the Boras narrative. Miller noted that Meyer was “always a professional,” even when he didn’t see eye-to-eye with him personally.
I believe what [Meyer] has been quoted as saying about it not being true,” said Miller. “It’s not something I ever saw that was worrying to me.”
One of Miller’s former peers on the union’s executive subcommittee, Daniel Murphy, offered a different take — without speculating about a possible Meyer/Boras relationship. Murphy spoke more broadly in favor of new leadership, telling Passan “…guys are finally seeing the truth.”
Boras, who’s already publicly taken shots at Marino and denied having the sort of cloak-and-dagger influence over the union as portrayed in that common narrative, again spoke candidly on the matter after yesterday’s Blake Snell press conference with the Giants. Nightengale quotes Boras again blasting Marino, this time for deliberately excluding his clients in a move he suggests won’t be well received by the union membership as a whole.
“Go to the union,” said Boras. “Be upfront. Let them know what your plan is. If it’s a better plan, we should all listen. We’re not denying information. But when you take a course of secrecy, selectivity, and denial of information from a category of major leaguers, you’re not going to be well-received by the totality of the group.”
Boras further pushed back on the narrative that he holds great influence in the union, noting that he thought the MLBPA accepted a deal too soon during the last wave of collective bargaining — particularly calling out the concessions the union made within the amateur draft. He also took a not-so-subtly veiled shot at Marino and his lack of experience in negotiations of this magnitude.
“I can tell you clear and convincingly that labor expertise and CBA direction is a science of itself,” Boras said. “It requires great expertise. You have to have experience. You don’t see Major League Baseball going in and placing inexperienced people to head a negotiation on their behalf.”
Suffice it to say, there’s a broad range of opinions on the current leadership within the union, on Boras’ influence (or lack thereof), and on how the group should move forward. Some of the Boras narrative could stem from the fact that five of the eight members of the executive subcommittee are Boras clients, but both McCullers and Miller rather firmly disputed the popular characterization. Boras did as well, firmly stating that he “operates for [his] players individually” and “not for the union.”
One notable takeaway comes from McCullers, in particular, who suggested that the entire characterization that the union is weak right now is misconstrued. Rather, McCullers points to the divide in opinions as a symbol of strength — as it’s indicative that member interest and involvement is at an all-time high.
“Typically in the past, it was like the player reps had to almost, I don’t want to say pull teeth, but almost had to really engage guys and really try to get a sense of what they feel and then go to the subcommittee,” McCullers explained. “…I think now, you’re seeing all players across the board — not even guys on the subcommittee, not even guys who are actually player reps — wanting to be involved and wanting to have their voices heard. I think that’s where this is coming from. Guys want a clear, decisive path that all players are behind. I think that’s good. Maybe people want to push the narrative that the union is weak, but at the end of the day, I think the union is strong.”
McCullers noted that the engagement spans all ranks of players, from minor leaguers on the bottom end of the earning scale to the game’s top-paid stars. He recalled an anecdote from the last wave of collective bargaining talks:
“Gerrit Cole is pounding the table on year two of his nine-year free agency deal … and literally said ‘I will miss the entire year if that’s what I have to do to help advance player rights in the CBA.’ He has nothing to gain from that. All he has is money to lose. You’ve seen guys over the history of our union, especially this last CBA, willing to make big sacrifices that matter to them and that affect them negatively only.”
For now, there’s no action that’ll be forced. Clark has heard opinions on Meyer’s status, but the decision on his deputy director’s future lies with Clark alone — for now. Drellich, Rosenthal and Passan all suggest that Marino could attempt to force a vote on Clark’s very status within the union — a full-scale powerplay to install himself atop the union hierarchy. That’d be potentially damaging in its own right, however, as a massive portion of his supporting contingent lies with minor league players and not established big leaguers who form the foundation of the union and who hold a larger number of executive board and executive subcommittee seats.
Time will tell whether Clark feels enough pressure to make a move or whether Marino and his supporters attempt to further force the issue. What’s clear right now is that there are multiple factions, each with their own view of the unrest among the union, even though there are those among the group who will contest that the increased engagement is a sign of strength and good sign for the long-term health of the organization, contrary as it may seem.
This one belongs to the Reds
Players are getting wise that letting the agents run THEIR show is not in THEIR best interest.
showmebb
Seems like agencies competing with Boras are blaming him for their issues and want to have one of their guys in a position of power.
Yankee Clipper
Ken Rosenthal spoke on this subject and confirmed that, based on the information he has, it seems most Boras clients are aligned in favor of keeping Meyer.
I would also like to point out that while Marino is stating he isn’t trying to orchestrate a coup, he’s not exactly taking himself out of the running for a position that currently belongs to Meyer.
All in all, I don’t believe rushing this would be a wise union decision, and here’s why: Marino is only 33-years-old and is not a labor attorney, like many in that position are. He likely would not have the knowledge or experience to sufficiently handle that position without surrounding himself with capable people (which he could do). But it may also prove futile to take away Clark’s right hand man to give him someone it seems he doesn’t want.
178iq
Surprised that there isn’t as much written about the recent gambling scandal.
He gambled and lost 4.5 million and he asked Showtime to pay the bookie off for him. In 1/2 million $ payments. He didn’t know gambling was illegal & he learned the hard way and learned his lesson.
Oh wait- never mind. Showtime didn’t know anything about the gambling and instead of the original story that was the truth- the real truth is that he stole 4.5 million from Showtime, paying 1/2 million $ wire transfers to pay off the bookie- that Showtime didn’t notice. Really? He just knows all of Showtime’s passwords etc… come on. These 2 guys are as bad at lying as they are at sports book.
yeasties
who cares? I don’t.
Rishi
I agree with Yeasties. The main problem with Law is when it tries to be the moral guard in a broad way. If someone does something that doesn’t effect anyone else negatively why should there be punishment? Who has this effected beyond the party involved? How is this that different than losing money on stock market? Unless Shohei was betting against Angels who cares?
Jon M
Good to know, yeasty boy
Os1995
Honestly I don’t buy it that the interpreter was the one gambling. I don’t care how good of a friend you are, I’m not paying off your 4.5m debt.
178iq
Hahahahah exactly.
User 4245925809
—- These 2 guys are as bad at lying as they are at sports book. —
They are both lawyers aren’t they? Why expect honesty, much less common decency from the likes of.
178iq
A popular opinion is that Showtime was having his little buddy lay bets, with the bookie knowing who is was- thusly rigging/ fixing odds- perhaps that bookie was relaying those bets to other books- then showtime was laying opposing bets with a ghost better and TOTALLY cleaning up. Seems that little guy lost big- but when someone loses big someone somewhere wins bigger.
178iq
Very Interesting point.
philliesphan77
It’s Shotime, champ. There’s no W in Shohei. If you’re going to overuse something, please get it right at least.
178iq
Figures the moron who is arguing the correct spelling of a word is from Pennsylvania. I didn’t say Philly because these like a 99% chance you don’t liv win the city. It’s funny, Philly is about the size of 5 square blocks of NYC and yet- everyone from Pennsylvania seems to claim “Philly”.
I don’t care for misspellings, unless they are accidental typos.
Jon M
Username does not check out
YankeesBleacherCreature
It’s worth noting that Clark can also be removed by a vote from the 72-player executive board. If Marino can yield so much influence being an “outsider” currently, think of what he can do if he replaces Meyer. I agree that everyone should be heard and that no hasty decision should be made.
Joe says...
YBC can he be removed by a simple majority vote or does it require a higher percentage?
CardsFan57
If this is Boras pushing a coup, the union needs to shut that down. That split would be difficult to heal.
Mustard Tiger
I love disunion amongst the union!
Jubilation
Let me guess you wish owners broke the union last time?
Divebomber81
Yes.
SupremeZeus
This is literally some esoteric inside baseball stuff.
shortstop
That Gerrit Cole anecdote is not as heroic as McCullers makes it out to be… Cole has already made enough money to last several lifetimes. Part of the criticism of the current PA leadership has been their focus on the top earners, and this story only reinforces that notion.
straightuphonestguy
Cole’s willingness to sacrifice his guaranteed salary seems a straightforward show of solidarity. What other possible interpretation is there?
nukeg
“Sacrificing” a year of a 9 year $324M contract is much different than forcing a guy who is fighting to make the MLB to skip a year in his prime.
It’s no coincidence the MiLB rep is battling the rich MLB reps because the focus has been on the upper MLB echelon. Gerritt Cole pounding on the table is about as perfect of a visual as you can get.
shortstop
straightup, in solidarity with whom? The other top earners? If I’m a player on the fringes of a 40-man roster, I’m not pounding the table to miss a year of service time, salary, etc.
straightuphonestguy
I have no idea what Cole’s desires for the MLBPA holding out were. It could just as easily be increasing the guaranteed minimum or removing QO; your guess is as good as mine. Clearly, he cares enough about all of his union members that he’s willing to put his money where his mouth is with something like 10% of his career earnings on the table.
shortstop
I guess I shouldn’t try to speculate on his motives. I agree with your assessment that he cares about the union, but unfortunately it’s difficult when the members of said union have different interests.
straightuphonestguy
I get where you’re coming from, for sure. I’d hazard many players on the periphery have similar concerns, especially now that the minor leaguers will be part of negotiations.
LordD99
It’s absolutely a power play by Marino, and he’s doing it by using minor leaguers against major leaguers. Almost have to wonder if the owners are secretly supporting him in an attempt to create a divide within the union. Marvin Miller built unity, which is how the MLBPA became the envy of all sports league unions. Marino is doing the opposite. At minimum, the owners have to love watching this.
A cap would simply create a hard ceiling and a greater squeeze on the middle class of players. What they do need is an equivalent soft floor with heavy financial penalties for repeat offenders with loss of money and draft picks. That was a mistake by the union when they agreed to the soft cap with penalties while not implementing the equivalent on the other end.
websoulsurfer
Several owners made their players accessible to Marino over the last year as 2 of the articles point out. Since he was NOT part of the union, that is extremely suspect.
66TheNumberOfTheBest
We have literal decades that prove that cap and floor systems work very well for both the league and the players but baseball is still like…
“That thing that works well for everyone else could never work.”
Penny wise, pound foolish. Getting poorer for their own greed.
Baseball players makes the lowest % of their sports revenue and it’s not close. Short sighted.
Angels & NL West
It’s my understanding that a lower percentage of baseball revenue goes towards salaries than football or basketball because baseball teams have more infrastructure to pay for – minor league teams, players, stadiums, etc. Football and basketball benefit by having colleges largely act as their minor league systems. Hopefully, someone more well versed on the topic can provide some clarity.
66TheNumberOfTheBest
Let the owners pay for their own infrastructure.
Boras convinced players they could always get more so a cap/floor would be a CAP and not a FLOOR.
Players in most sports get about half, MLB is around 40%.
So, again, that greed was short sighted.
Os1995
The envy of all sports league unions? They get paid the lowest percent of the leagues revenue of all the North American major sports. They are falling behind the NFL, NHL, and NBA on pay but at least the don’t have a cap (or a floor like every other league has).
straightuphonestguy
I’m guessing Marino will have widespread support once the next generation of minor leaguers gets called up. Always seemed so strange to me that the MLBPA never covered minor leaguers before last year.
websoulsurfer
They couldn’t “cover” them because they were not part of the MLBPA union. Its literally against federal labor law.
straightuphonestguy
My musing was why weren’t they included from the get-go. If there were an extended labor dispute, your potential strikebreakers would be prime for the picking.
websoulsurfer
Marino is a backstabbing shark. Exactly who you DON’T want leading a union.
KiKiCuyler
I’m curious if you’ve ever been in high stakes negotiations, where if you get stabbed in the back, it’s probably your own fault for not looking behind you. In this case Clark, Meyer and Boras were remiss in not detecting unhappiness in their membership. This stuff doesn’t happen out of the blue, unless you’re not paying attention. It’s been obvious since the 2016 agreement that clubs were blatantly manipulating service time and gaming arbitration, while deciding that blowing g big $$ on mediocre 32 year d veterans didn’t make sense. This problem has been around d for awhile, and Clark and Meyer cling to the salary cap issue while giving in on everything else. A $50 million pot? Chump change – that’s one year of Scherzer and 20% of the Dodgers payroll.
websoulsurfer
I have been a union rep on an executive committee.
Mikenmn
There’s little question that past CBAs reflected a poor focus by MLBPA–too intent on worrying about the top-tier of players and QOs. and little done to improve the experience of younger, more easily manipulated ones. The last CBA showed some gains that were significant. What the MLBPA has not done well yet is how to deal with the CBT/penalities/draft pick loss, etc. And they have been unsuccessful in getting the Owners to move on tanking. The inside baseball of who is aligned with who inside the mLBPA is basically a distraction.
LABeachguy
Do the players really think they are not receiving enough salary from the owners on their contracts? That they should be making more? Look at the latest rounds of free agency, even the top players have their flaws and don’t necessary deserve to be paid the money they think they deserve. Hearing that Cole would sit out a year is pretty concerning.
Wrian Washman
And here we go with the salary cap nonsense. Small markets refuse to invest in putting a meaningful product on the field and that’s the Yankees and Dodgers fault? Imagine Juan Soto signing a 10 year $50M contract with the Athletics because they’re the only ones who have any cap space left don’t make me laugh small market fans. Your team doesn’t magically become world series favorites after you financially handicap teams that actually make an effort to stir excitement within their respective fanbases. You have every right to question the fairness and balance of power within any governing body (as you should) but instead of bringing the big dogs down think of ways to bring the small dogs up.
Os1995
I think you misunderstand the argument for using the salary cap model. Every league that has a salary cap also has a salary floor as well which would force small market teams to spend more money (for example the nfl salary floor is 89% of the salary cap). In other leagues, the use of a salary floor/cap model has resulted in higher player pay than leagues without a floor and cap.
I also think the competitive balance would also help grow the game and create excitement in more fan bases because each team would be on a level playing field.
straightuphonestguy
Good points. MLB already has a de facto cap (and floor for that matter with league minimums); the issue is the gap.
Os1995
The NFL, NBA, and NHL have salary floors of 89, 90, and 74 percent of their respective caps. In none of those sports do you see teams competing with teams that have 5x the payroll.
Wrian Washman
The issue isn’t the gap it’s the lack of incentive for effort. After 3 consecutive seasons under .500 start taking away draft picks starting with 1st round. By the 4th season take 1st round pick. By the 5th consecutive season under .500 you take the first and second rounds so on so forth. (Exclude compensatory picks from QO players signing elsewhere). If you can’t get a team to win 82 games in half a decade you deserve to get stripped of those picks. The picks that were stripped are awarded to the worst record at or above .500 in order of record. 82-82 teams get first dibs etc. Percentage based draft lottery is a joke and does not disincentivize tanking at all. Oh no instead of 1st overall I can still tank and pick top 5 oh please don’t punish me like this MLB ooouuuu.
Os1995
The lottery doesn’t allow a team to pick in the top 10 3 years in a row.
Why come up with a convoluted plan that isnt guaranteed to force teams to spend when every other league has figured out a system that works and we know will force teams to spend? MLB players are missing out on roughly 1.2 billion in salary per year by fighting against the salary floor/cap system.
straightuphonestguy
It sort of sounds like slow relegation, no? I agree that tanking is awful for the league, but a salary floor solves many issues. If the money coming in from broadcast deals, profit sharing, etc., must be spent, teams will prioritize how to spend it most effectively.
Wrian Washman
Because it can lead to comical loopholes not to mention even for hardcore capitalists 89% is steep. Just overpay a couple of relievers on laughable 1 year contracts and boom you made the salary floor. A solution should incentivize effort not force it. Staunch salary cap supporters always ignore the fact that those sports still suffer massive competitive gaps. The Warriors vs LeBron James was the NBA finals for like 3 consecutive years despite “max contracts” super teams are still being paid for. The Chiefs are always in the playoffs the Jets are always not. Stripping prospects from no effort franchises and awarding them to those showing effort isn’t “convoluted” it’s literally life. Work for what you want/need or don’t and starve and be homeless.
Os1995
I just cant support a system that further decreases competitive balance as opposed to supports it. You are correct in that better run franchises can still make dynasties regardless of a salary cap but they should be rewarded for running a good organization.
Your point about 1 year contracts to relievers also doesnt make any sense. Why would a team waste money on purpose when signing a big name player could put fans in the stands thereby increasing profit, the thing the cheap owners are really after. Another way the teams would increase salary to get over the floor is to sign the teams young stars to extensions early which will help keep costs below the cap once the team is competitive again.
If the MLB scaled the cap and floor to league revenue like the NFL does then the Cap would be 200m and the floor would be 180m. Every team would be able to support that through revenue sharing, TV deals, ticket sales.
straightuphonestguy
@Os: Tie the player’s compensation to 50% (or whatever bargained amount) of league revenue, so a team’s salary floor is just a thirtieth of that value after subtracting cost for player benefits. Then the owners can determine where they want to set the salary cap.
KiKiCuyler
10-15 teams are $100 million or more UNDER the luxury tax. That means it’s meaningless for the vast bulk of the players. A hard cap and a floor would force the small markets to spend more and lead to less money going to Gerrit Cole, who doesn’t need it. Look at the NFL free agency, where young guys in their primes were signing lucrative deals right and left. The MLBPA, in cahoots with Boras and the big market teams, have created a system that only rewards a few superstars, while the extended path to free agency and lack of revenue sharing makes it so the majority of NLB players never get the big payday. Small market owners will never give up a salary floor and shorter path to free agency without more revenue sharing and a salary cap. And MLB has too many small market teams. This is only going to get worse w the failure of the regional sports networks. It all goes back to the inequality in MLB – something that has never been addressed, and hurts the popularity of the sport.