Strike Zone Is Getting Dangerous

As the next and expected step in labor negotiations that are going nowhere, the Major League Players Assn. has begun considering possible strike dates as a reluctant recourse if convinced that baseball owners are determined to unilaterally implement new work rules when the World Series ends.

“We have not settled on any dates or proposed any to our executive board,” Don Fehr, the union’s executive director, said Wednesday in Los Angeles, preparing to brief area player agents on the labor talks today.

“We hope we don’t have to do that,” he continued, referring to the setting of a strike date.

“The goal is to reach a settlement, but in any labor negotiation, you have to consider all of your alternatives.”

The setting of a strike date--or a strike itself--would not be a surprise.

Reminiscent of the 1994 labor upheaval, it has been viewed as an oft-chronicled possibility amid management’s determined try to overhaul the economic system with bargaining proposals aimed at restricting payroll growth and taking revenue from the New York Yankees and other big spenders who drive the market.

Although Commissioner Bud Selig has pledged not to lock out the players during the season or postseason, he has offered no assurances about the off-season, when owners, without negotiating movement, could declare an impasse and implement their own work rules.

Fehr refused comment, but a union official said, “We weren’t misled. We fully understood the message in Bud’s pledge.”

At Dodger Stadium Wednesday night, Selig cited the “painful memories” of 1994, said he was reluctant to get involved in the “sideshows” and added, “The only way to resolve all this is at the table ... [and] before everyone overreacts, you have to remember there hasn’t been a strike date set yet.”

Anticipating the owners’ attempt to implement new rules amid stalled negotiations in 1994, the players walked out after games Aug. 11, thinking their dramatic action might stimulate an agreement in time to return for the playoffs and World Series. When there was still no agreement on Sept. 14, Selig canceled the World Series for the first time since 1904. The owners did ultimately implement new work rules only to be found guilty of unfair labor practice in federal court, ending the longest of baseball’s eight work stoppages.

Short of an agreement before this season ends--and both sides agree there has been no progress on the key economic issues--the union is again reluctant to enter the off-season without any leverage, with unsigned players at the mercy of a new system that would certainly include the two key management proposals now on the table: a 50% tax on all payroll above $98 million and an increase in revenue sharing from 20% of local income to 50% after park expenses.

Although the union will not accept a tax it considers tantamount to a salary cap and an artificial drain on salaries, Fehr hinted Wednesday he is bewildered by an absence of meaningful negotiations and the refusal of owners to respond to union proposals on revenue sharing and other issues. The result, he suggested, is general confusion over where the owners are headed.

Concerned about igniting a public debate with Selig and the owners, Fehr refused to discuss any of that in depth, but an aide said there can be only four possible conclusions as to the owners’ possible direction:

* They still operate under the mistaken belief that the union can be broken and apparently believe another prolonged work stoppage, initiated by the implementing of new work rules, won’t damage the game beyond repair.

* They feel they can begin serious negotiations on the eve of a strike, even though any trust will have been destroyed by then and there will have been no groundwork laid.

* They have no interest in serious talks until the arbitration decision on contraction, which is not expected until mid-July or later, killing several more weeks of potential bargaining.

* They are frozen in place, with Selig uncertain of how to move off his bargaining positions without a loss of face.

None of that has merit, Selig and his negotiating team would say. It is simply time to change the system and address the revenue and competitive disparities. They would say--and have said--that they are there to negotiate and it is the union that has failed to provide meaningful responses.

The rhetoric is familiar, the lessons forgotten.

In response Wednesday to word that the union is now considering strike dates, Robert DuPuy, baseball’s chief operating officer, called it “a bit of a surprise and more of a disappointment given that the owners did not choose to exert economic leverage on the players” by declaring a lockout during the season. He said it was a disappointment as well because the owners are only trying to address competitive balance with a “noninflammatory deal” that avoids putting an economic onus directly on the players through a salary cap or tax.

“I still think we can work out a deal at the table,” DuPuy said. “I think we both have an understanding of what happened in 1994 when the players struck, and we should be motivated to not let it happen again.”

Backed into a corner in ‘94, the players are beginning to feel cornered again.

Their executive board, made up essentially of player representatives from various clubs, probably will meet in Chicago on the Monday before the July 9 All-Star game in Milwaukee to hear the union’s recommendation regarding a strike and the dates.

It is also possible that the union, knowing that high-salaried players will always take the brunt of fan criticism during a stoppage no matter the circumstances, will ask several All-Stars to make a public plea for industry peace during that period, explaining their position on the key issues.

If it comes to a strike, early August is again the probable period, although the union could go out even earlier if convinced that the Fox television contract continues to underwrite the owners in the event of a stoppage. An earlier strike date would threaten the owners with an increased loss at the gate and deprive the players of a larger percentage of salary.

Would this all be different if Selig had not pulled the negotiating rug from under his then-chief operating officer--and since resigned--Paul Beeston last summer or if so many valuable weeks of the winter had not been wasted on contraction?

Doesn’t the loss of faith and hope in too many cities, as the commissioner likes to darken the picture, really come down to suspect management?

Can baseball survive another stoppage?

Unfortunate questions without answers in mid-May of a season in which the Montreal Expos, Minnesota Twins, Florida Marlins and Cincinnati Reds are among the clubs trying to prove there’s more balance than some people would have you believe.