The Phillies are part of a group of teams that plan to pay employees through May 31GETTY IMAGES
MLB will inform clubs today of a "decision that will give them greater flexibility in dealing with non-playing personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic," according to Ken Rosenthal of THE ATHLETIC. Sources said that effective May 1, Commissioner Rob Manfred "will suspend Uniform Employee Contracts, enabling teams to furlough employees or reduce their pay." Clubs "would not be required to take such measures," but MLB's decision "would provide the possibility of relief for clubs facing the most significant financial duress" as the '20 season remains on hold. The Uniform Player Contracts "contain a similar provision to the UECs, allowing Manfred to withhold pay in the event of a national emergency." Non-playing personnel includes "managers and coaches at the major- and minor-league levels, some front-office staffers and scouts." Sources said that once MLB suspends the contracts of those employees, clubs "can talk to them about a variety of adjustments, including the deferral of pay." The suspension "will allow clubs to continue those employees' health benefits." The Braves, Phillies and Giants are among the teams that will "reportedly pay their employees through May 31" (THEATHLETIC.com, 4/19).
STILL TOO MANY UNKNOWNS: In Chicago, Mark Gonzales writes MLB "could be headed toward another economic showdown if the regular season is to be played without fans, which seems highly likely" if there is a season. There is "no doubt money has a lot to do with the urge on both sides to play," as "regaining some of the money already lost helps everyone." But some MLBers have said that they "want more answers about their health and safety before feeling comfortable about starting a season" (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 4/20). The WALL STREET JOURNAL's Diamond & Radnofsky write MLB's "crazy contingency plan" to stage the regular season in Arizona in empty ballparks "might not be completely crazy after all." Local lawmakers and federal public health experts have "given cautious backing to the idea." That has "kept it alive among baseball officials even if it still remains far-off and full of complex medical and logistical obstacles." MLB "must be able to guarantee access to the testing infrastructure to monitor those people every single week of a season -- without that taking away capacity from the front-line response to the pandemic, or other sectors of the economy considered to be higher-priority" (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 4/20). In N.Y., Joel Sherman noted MLB officials "insist plans on where to play, how to play and which of myriad schedule possibilities to employ have been mulled." But without more information about testing, antibodies, death rates and which elected officials are going to give their blessings, it is "all theory and, thus, not yet worth proposing to the union or chiseling in stone" (N.Y. POST, 4/19).
EFFECT ON PLAYER SALARIES: In N.Y., Tyler Kepner wrote as MLB ponders its return, a "distressing backdrop still looms: If teams cannot sell tickets, how much will the players be paid?" A top official from one club said, "The issue over pay without fans is going to get ugly. It's very real. Owners will claim they'd lose money by playing without fans if players get their full per-game salaries, and it may be true. They're going to want a big reduction in pay from players." Kepner noted as things stand, MLB and the MLBPA have had "no further discussions on the pay structure of a shortened season, because there are too many variables about the conditions." But the "strong feeling from the union is that teams would be obligated to pay the players their regular salaries, prorated to reflect the number of games played" (N.Y. TIMES, 4/19). On Long Island, David Lennon noted the owners "did include some fine print regarding the neutral-site, no-fans contingency" plan in Arizona. A source said the language in the March 27 agreement between MLB and the MLBPA reads, "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." Lennon wrote as far as MLB is concerned, the March 27 agreement was a "jumping-off point designed to smooth over some necessary, significant speed bumps around Opening Day." It was "not meant to be the final, binding resolution" for the '20 season, "only because no one could possibly know what such a season was going to look like" (NEWSDAY, 4/19).
SKEPTICAL OF ARIZONA PLAN: In Pittsburgh, Jason Mackey wondered if stars like Angels CF Mike Trout and Dodgers P Clayton Kershaw are skeptical of the Arizona plan, "what does that mean for everybody else?" Pirates P Derek Holland said, "If they're not agreeing on something, we want to make sure we're right there with them. We're a big family. We're definitely going to stick together." Holland added he does not "see a lot of guys agreeing" with the Arizona plan. Holland: "What about the guys who have houses in Arizona? You're going to tell me they can't go live in their own house? That's not going to fly. To me, I think that's a dumb thing we're trying to do" (PITTSBURGH POST-GAZETTE, 4/19). In Toronto, Gregor Chisholm wrote the "biggest obstacle to a return to play" for MLB is the "lack of widespread coronavirus testing." Players will "not congregate in Arizona unless they are able to get tested at least a few times per week and likely more." MLB also "won't be able to force players to live in isolation." Some players "might opt out of the season entirely, while others may be forced to take extended leaves" (TORONTO STAR, 4/19). In Chicago, Paul Sullivan believes clubs "should play at their own ballparks" if the season happens, and lists 5 steps to "make it work" (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 4/19).
