Negotiators Trade Shots in Baseball Talks

There were some new suggestions in baseball’s collective bargaining talks Wednesday.

Charles O’Connor, general counsel of the owners’ Player Relations Committee, suggested that Don Fehr, executive director of the Major League Players Assn., showed immaturity in comments made after the union’s executive board meeting in Phoenix Tuesday.

And Fehr, in response, suggested that it is O’Connor who is being immature.

In addition to this personal war of words, O’Connor said that comments made by Fehr and some players tended to paint the negotiations in the athletic context of win or lose, prompting some clubs to harden Wednesday in their opposition to a compromise settlement and, perhaps, complicating a difficult process.

“Harden?” said Fehr with disbelief. “What are they going to do, stage a lockout?”

All of this long distance repartee took place on Day 14 of the owners lockout of spring training camps.

O’Connor, presumably in response to those Tuesday comments by Fehr and the players, conducted a conference call from his New York office with about a dozen reporters around the country.

Fehr, reached in Phoenix, attempted to decipher O’Connor’s statement while he waited for a flight to Los Angeles, where he will meet with another group of players this morning.

He will then leave for Tampa, Fla., and another meeting with players on Friday night, after which he will return to New York and the possible resumption of negotiations.

There were cursory contacts between the union and PRC Wednesday dealing with language on agreements already reached.

Fehr also called New York to exchange itineraries with deputy commissioner Steve Greenberg, who promptly left for Los Angeles, his hometown.

Greenberg, an attorney and former player agent, has been on a bi-coastal schedule since becoming Fay Vincent’s assistant, but this trip, after the call from Fehr, generated speculation that he might meet privately with the union leader here.

Meanwhile, the comments that seemed to spark Wednesday’s debate were made by Fehr Tuesday in reference to the roles of Vincent and O’Connor.

“I don’t know why anybody is talking about Chuck O’Connor,” Fehr said. “He’s clearly ceased being the chief management spokesman. The commissioner is now their chief spokesman. He’s taken over, and that’s good in a way. It’s refreshing to have somebody working for the owners who acknowledges he’s working for the owners.”

A slap at O’Connor? At Vincent?

“I don’t make personal comments,” Fehr said. “If I’m going to make one, you’ll know it.

“Bud Selig (owner of the Milwaukee Brewers and chairman of the PRC) called Vincent a third-party mediator the other day.

“I simply set the record straight, and everybody gets upset. The silliness goes on.”

O’Connor said a number of clubs were definitely upset, feeling Fehr had denigrated Vincent’s attempts to find a solution as baseball’s chief executive officer.

As for himself, O’Connor said he would put more credence in Fehr’s remark if it had been made to his face. He referred to his long career as a labor negotiator and said:

“I’ve been insulted by experts, so I don’t regard it as personal insult.

“At the same time, to attempt to get into personal characterizations, which can only be thought of as intemperate or designed as sort of divide-and-conquer strategy is a bit immature and not wise to the process.

“On balance, I don’t think it’s terribly helpful.”

O’Connor said he thought Vincent could be persuaded to remain active in the negotiations, that Fehr’s comments were probably inadvertent and could be clarified.

“One of the reasons I’m here and not at my law firm,” O’Connor said, “is that I share Fay’s idea that what we have been trying to do in this was begin the process of building a relationship, but if what is coming out of the rhetoric in Phoenix is that compromise is not in the wind, that there has to be sort of a win-lose philosophy, then that process has definitely been made more difficult.

“And I’d be less than candid if I didn’t acknowledge that there probably has been a hardening of position (among the clubs).

“When you put things on a win-lose basis, you almost invite that response. When owners read headlines that say baseball players say they won’t concede, it illicits the type response you’d expect. . . . ‘Well, if they won’t concede, we won’t concede.’

“Those amenable to reaching and finding a compromise 24 hours ago may be less amenable. That doesn’t mean they can’t turn back around, but action begets reaction, and we spent a lot of time on the phone today, talking to clubs who were calling to give advice.”

O’Connor refused to name the clubs, which didn’t surprise Fehr, who said the comments sounded like someone “not making a lot of sense.”

Fehr alluded to the win or lose contention and said it was “the most immature-ish bit of nonsense I’ve ever heard. I mean, our position has never changed. There’s been no hardening, no softening. We didn’t come out with anything new yesterday.

“Unless the owners thought we were cracking into pieces and are upset we didn’t, all of it sounds like an excuse for someone trying to break off the negotiations.”