Hope springs eternal, so considerable optimism accompanied the surprise announcement that negotiators Don Fehr and Dick Ravitch had resumed bargaining here Friday, the first day of the baseball players’ strike.
They met for two hours, but both sides reported no appreciable progress except that they have agreed to federal mediation. Fehr and Ravitch emphasized that mediation had not been requested, but had been offered by the Federal Medication and Conciliation Service. And both sides conceded that it wouldn’t hurt.
Initially, the mediator will meet separately with union and management officials. After two or three of these sessions, a joint meeting is likely.
Fehr, executive director of the 800-member Major League Baseball Players Association, called Friday’s meeting with the apparent expectation that the owners were modifying their principal proposal of a salary cap. This view may have been encouraged Thursday when four of the 28 owners seemed to express dissatisfaction that the negotiations were stalemated.
“It was specifically designed to find out if we could get a response,” Fehr said. “But once again, Mr. Ravitch disappeared into the black hole in Calcutta.”
As usual, Ravitch followed Fehr in what has grown into dueling press conferences. But Ravitch’s manner changed distinctly. He was much more aggressive and came out swinging.
“It’s a simple question of compensation,” Ravitch said, his voice rising in anger. “The average salary of the players is now $1.2 million, and all we have been trying to find out is, How much more do they want? We never get an answer and until we do, I don’t know what collective bargaining can produce.”
Fehr reiterated that the players had to strike. “We had only two options-accept a cap or they will have the right to impose a cap,” he said.
This could occur in November, assuming the final 52 days of the regular season are wiped out, along with the playoffs and the World Series. After declaring an impasse, the owners could unilaterally implement all or most of their proposals.
Fehr repeatedly claimed the dispute was essentially an intramural skirmish between the owners on revenue sharing.
He described their proposal as a “Rube Goldberg contraption with revenue sharing tied into a salary cap that would destroy the free-agent market for players.”
Fehr said the union had submitted several suggestions as to how the teams in the smaller markets could receive financial assistance, but that the owners had dismissed them without discussion. One union recommendation was that the visiting teams in the National League, instead of receiving 5 or 10 cents on the dollar, be given 20 percent of the gate, same as in the American League.
“This could produce substantial revenue for San Diego, Pittsburgh and Montreal, three of the clubs the National League is worried about,” Fehr said.
Ravitch insisted that Fehr has been clouding the principal issue of the salary cap with his repeated mention of revenue sharing among the owners. “Revenue sharing,” he said, “is not a subject of collective bargaining. The question is not how the clubs run their business internally.”
One publication reported that Colorado Rockies owner Jerry McMorris said Ravitch should not be negotiating alone, but should be flanked at the bargaining table by at least two owners. McMorris also said the salary-cap proposal should be modified or eliminated.
“Jerry McMorris has been in on every conference call,” Ravitch replied, “and has never suggested we modify our approach.”
In questioning about reports that three or four owners have expressed disfavor with the pace of the negotiations, Ravitch was asked whether he would reveal the names or the number of owners who are pleased with his effort.
“I can’t do that,” he said. “I’m not in it for pats on the back.”
