Owners Offer Cut in Shared Money

NEW YORK — Major League Baseball’s lead labor lawyer on Wednesday said owners have presented a revenue-sharing proposal to players that he considered a “substantial move toward the union both in structure and in transfer amount.”

Rob Manfred declined to reveal the offer management had made Tuesday in an attempt to spur lagging talks and avert the sport’s ninth work stoppage in 30 years, but a lawyer close to the talks said owners reduced their proposal from $282 million to $268 million. The union’s current offer is $235 million, meaning the sides are $33 million apart on the amount of money that would be transferred from high-revenue to low-revenue clubs. Union officials are expected to respond as early as today to the offer.

Meanwhile, the commissioner’s office began preparing for another potentially lengthy strike, informing clubs to reduce expenses if play stops. The sides have not made progress since the union set an Aug. 30 walkout date, but they’re still at the table and finally getting back to key economic issues.

“We spent the day on non-core issues in order to give the [union] some time to prepare a response to the proposal,” Manfred said. “Hopefully, we’ll get it [today].”

Although acknowledging the owners’ effort, union officials did not seem encouraged by the revised revenue-sharing plan.

“Boy, Rob sure is interested in PR,” union head Don Fehr said. “We got something from them [Tuesday] and there have been a lot of things going back and forth on a lot of issues right now. We’re going to study everything and get back to them soon. That’s really all there is to it.”

Owners, seeking improved salary-restraint tools in the next agreement, have demanded increased revenue sharing and a tax on high payrolls, prompting opposition from players who view the two-tiered system as a salary cap. Management is still awaiting a response to a payroll-tax proposal it made last week.

The ball is in the union’s court, Manfred said.

“Frankly, we made a tax proposal last Wednesday and we haven’t gotten a response on that yet, other than a little speech from their committee,” he said. “I am frustrated a little bit. I’d like that there’d be more active dialogue on the tax and the revenue sharing, but it takes two parties to have a dialogue.”

Manfred said management’s new revenue-sharing proposal “substantially reduced the gap” between the sides, but the union said that’s a matter of perspective.

“Substantial means different things to different people,” said Gene Orza, associate general council for the players’ association. “It was a productive move worthy of recognition. It was far more discernable than their tax proposal.”

Under that management proposal, a team would be taxed at 37.5% the first time it exceeded the tax threshold, 42.5% the second time, 47.5% the third time and 50% the fourth time. Management, also seeking to have payroll based on 40-man instead of 25-man rosters, adopted the union tax-rate formula, but increased the threshold only $4 million--to $102 million--from its starting figure.

Under the union offer, the minimum payroll subject to being taxed would be $130 million in 2003, $140 million in 2004 and $150 million in 2005, at which point the tax would end. The tax would be assessed at a rate of 15% for clubs above the threshold once, 25% twice and 30% three times.

Manfred acknowledged time is running out to get a deal done. “I’m concerned that the players have made a threat to not continue to play the games,” he said. “I’d like to do everything possible in order to get an agreement, an acceptable agreement from the perspective of the clubs, of course, that would prevent them from carrying out that threat.”