Whether or not players deserve credit for 75 days of service
time lost during the strike "continues to be the main holdup in
settling the three-year labor war," according to Dave Van Dyck of
the CHICAGO SUN-TIMES. MLB chief labor negotiator Randy Levine
"was said to be livid with his labor committee ... for not
supporting his efforts to trade service time for another issue."
Levine, who spent much of yesterday on the phone with owners
trying to line up support, is privately hopeful for a deal by
tomorrow night or Friday (CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, 8/14). MLBPA Exec
Dir Don Fehr: "If your object is to leave permanent scars and
exact permanent retribution, you fight over this issue. If you
want peace, you don't" (AP/ATLANTA CONSTITUTION, 8/14). More
Fehr: "It's safe to say the owners have known for literally
years, at least more than a year, [service time] was something
that had to be done" ("SportsCenter," 8/13).
IS IT A DEAL-BREAKER? In L.A., Ross Newhan notes the
service time issue "seemed to have created considerable
uneasiness." He writes, "On the precipice of peace, with the
owners about to emerge with major economic concessions from the
union, the issue of service time has seemed to take on an
importance among some owners that does not equate to the damage
that an already damaged industry could suffer if this latest
attempt at a partnership blows up." At question is where acting
MLB Commissioner Bud Selig stands on the matter (L.A. TIMES,
8/14). According to the WASHINGTON POST, union officials believe
it is possible Levine "could complete and announce a deal in
principle with the players that would include full credit for the
missed service time, and put the pressure on the hard-line owners
to approve the settlement" (Mark Maske, WASHINGTON POST, 8/14).
According to two owners cited by the AP, most teams support
giving service time (Ronald Blum, AP/WASHINGTON TIMES, 8/14).
USA TODAY's Hal Bodley writes the deal "will now live or die on
service time." Noting his belief that the owners "have enough of
what they wanted to make the deal," Bodley adds that several
owners "don't care if the deal goes up in flames" because of
anger over the strike (USA TODAY, 8/14). ESPN's Karl Ravech:
"The players are trying to figure out anyway or anything they can
now give back to the owners in order to get ... service time"
("SportsCenter," 8/13).
JERRY-MANDERING? White Sox Chair Jerry Reinsdorf has been
"singled out" as the leading hard-liner who won't agree to give
service time without a major concession, namely the union's
agreement to drop all legal action from the strike. Reinsdorf,
yesterday: "I really can't talk about the labor agreement. ... I
give my opinion in the committee meetings. It's not right for
the rest of us to be speaking out" (Paul Sullivan, CHICAGO
TRIBUNE, 8/14). However, USA TODAY reports Reinsdorf was trying
to persuade other owners to join in opposition (Hal Bodley, USA
TODAY, 8/14).
WHO'S GOT THE POWER? Ross Newhan writes that an ownership
breakdown over service time "would confirm what the union has
suspected (but did not want to believe) all along, that Levine, a
respected deal-maker admired by the union, did not have any more
authority to close a deal than any of his predecessors" (L.A.
TIMES, 8/14).
