MLB嗆工會違反三月協定 - 美國職棒

https://tinyurl.com/y8fvllez

Deputy MLB commissioner Dan Halem suggested the union has not acted in good
faith in negotiations, hinting at the league’s possible stance if and when
this matter ends up before an arbitrator. By Halem’s framing, labor is
taking an obstructionist stance as the league provides what it labels a “
final counterproposal” for a 72-game season.

That the sides are now exchanging angry letters, even as the clock ticks on
squeezing in games, is to an extent merely confirmation of that underlying
state of affairs. But there’s also a nod to a serious escalation lurking
just beneath the surface. Halem hints less than subtly at a possible effort
by the league to disrupt the sides’ late March agreement, claiming the union
has “purposely failed to fulfill its obligations” and “deprived the Clubs
the benefit of their bargain” in the contract.

今天MLB提出新條件的同時 也一併嗆工會沒遵守三月簽約的規定 "故意阻撓談判"

也暗示如果把議題帶到仲裁的可能後果


ps: 如果不清楚三月協定的內容 這裡有詳細文本可參考

https://tinyurl.com/y7qocgml

The agreement, of which a copy was provided to USA TODAY Sports, lists three
provisions in order to play this year:

1. There are no federal, state, city, or local restrictions on mass
gatherings or other restrictions that would materially limit the Clubs’
ability to play games in front of spectators, with regular fan access, in
each of the 30 Clubs’ home ballparks; provided, however, that the
Commissioner will consider the use of appropriate substitute neutral sites
where economically feasible.

2. There shall be no relevant restrictions on traveling throughout the United
States and Canada.

3. The Commissioner determines, after consultation with recognized medical
experts and the Players Association, that it does not pose an unreasonable
health and safety risk to players, staff, or spectators to stage games in
front of fans in each of the 30 Clubs’ home ballparks; provided that, the
Office of the Commissioner and Players Association will discuss in good faith
the economic feasibility of playing games in the absence of spectators or at
appropriate substitute neutral sites.

聯盟就是根據上色部分和工會重談薪資

關於上色部分的意思 聯盟也據說曾和工會確認過

工會也同意是要在無觀眾比賽時談減薪事宜

https://tinyurl.com/y8lcgz2j

In an email that Houlihan sent to deputy commissioner Dan Halem, MLB’s lead
negotiator, that was cc-ed to several other prominent league officials, he
wrote on Issue 1:

“Matt asked what ‘economic feasibility’ meant in Section I. I told him it
meant that we would only consider playing in neutral sites or without fans if
it worked for us economically. I reminded him of Rob’s comments at the
outset that playing in empty stadiums did not work for us economically. But I
said, for example, that we might be willing to have a conversation about
playing some limited number of games in empty stadiums if players agreed to
reduce their daily salaries for those games, and if it was part of a larger
plan that made economic sense. Matt confirmed that that is what he thought we
meant, but appreciated the confirmation.”


如果真的上仲裁庭 誰會被打臉呢?

(按照上次Kris Bryant仲裁的結果 感覺現在的仲裁人很偏資方...)

--