New CBA Includes Payout for Collusion Damages

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

According to the NY Daily News, the recently agreed-upon CBA includes a 12-million dollar pay-out to the union for damages resulting from collusion by the owners during 2002.

 

 

The Daily News has learned that, in response to a grievance filed by the players union, a side element of the new deal includes a damages payment to the players for the owners once again engaging in collusion during the 2002 free agent signing period.

 

According to two sources with knowledge of the situation, the collusion issue was raised by a number of agents complaining that their free agent clients had received identical offers from numerous clubs. It was charged that those offers were actually being determined for the clubs by MLB's central office.

 

In a briefing on the new agreement to the 30 clubs on Tuesday, MLB officials acknowledged there would be a payment made to the union "to settle 50 grievances." It is believed the payment will be approximately $12 million and that it is to come from the nearly $70 million in luxury-tax funds currently being held in reserve by MLB.

 

 

Link.

 

Interesting.... :-k

[moorecg]

The most disturbing thing about this post is that Vance is quickly approaching 25 THOUSAND posts.

 

I think one might rightly question if he might not spend just a little bit tooo much time on NSBB :D

[CubsInNC]

Maybe it needs it's own thread, but this one also caught me by surprise.

 

Link

 

According to the Houston Chronicle, one of the changes is the drop of May 1 date for offering contracts to any of your own FAs whom you don't offer arbitration. I think this is probably labeled The Clemens Clause. But, it's nice.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

The most disturbing thing about this post is that Vance is quickly approaching 25 THOUSAND posts.

 

I think one might rightly question if he might not spend just a little bit tooo much time on NSBB :D

 

25,000 isn't really that much. O:)

 

Didn't Grudz accuse the owners of collusion in 2004? Poor Mark, doesn't get any compensation for that.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Maybe it needs it's own thread, but this one also caught me by surprise.

 

Link

 

According to the Houston Chronicle, one of the changes is the drop of May 1 date for offering contracts to any of your own FAs whom you don't offer arbitration. I think this is probably labeled The Clemens Clause. But, it's nice.

 

I mentioned that clause in the thread about the agreement, and yes, I feel it is significant.

 

The Astros have been burned by this rule more than once. It made them wait on Clemens last season, but it also created a deadline when they were negotiating with Beltran as well.

 

It's a rule that might have impacted the Cubs negotiations with Alou a few years back.

 

When it was instituted, it had a good purpose, but it wasn't good for clubs or players any longer.

 

On the player side, while it may have helped them by giving their current team a deadline, it also served to remove teams from the bidding process. On the team side, they might not offer arbitration because they didn't want to risk having a player accept, but they might want to continue to negotiate with that player.

 

I think this will be a very significant change in the CBA.

[CuseCubFan69]

The most disturbing thing about this post is that Vance is quickly approaching 25 THOUSAND posts.

 

I think one might rightly question if he might not spend just a little bit tooo much time on NSBB :D

 

25,000 isn't really that much. O:)

 

Didn't Grudz accuse the owners of collusion in 2004? Poor Mark, doesn't get any compensation for that.

 

Well the Union is happy to get the 12 million. It's too bad they don't use that money to help the pensions of the former players who blazed the trail for the current players to make so much money.