Well no pay raise coming from MiLB players.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
That's not really a loss. It was expected. That court - as well as the COA - really have no option but to dismiss because of the Supreme Court precedent in Federal Baseball Club v. National League as well as the Flood case. the strategy has to be to appeal it to the Supreme Court and get the MLB anti-trust exemption and Federal overturned.
MiLB players have a supply and demand issue. There is a virtual endless supply of 18-22 year olds looking to play and relative to the number of players very little demand from real money advertisers...they aren't going to win very much. even if they win in court the demand for the services is low and salary will stay low to match.
One thing I have learned in business over the last 20 years is we don't give supply and demand near enough credit - in the US it is virtually never wrong.
Well they do have something of a supply and demand problem, but they do not work in a free labor market. The supply/demand curve is greatly distorted by the fact that they have restricted labor mobility. Add to the fact that their employers have cartel rights to set wages and working conditions. As a consequence their employers don't even have to compete with each other for the available labor pool. Rather they collude.
Plus although there is a union that negotiates with that colluding cartel of an employer on their behalf, they have no representation in that union. Indeed, that union frequently colludes with the cartel employers to sell minor league players down the river for the good of its own members (major league players.)
Plus I do think you underestimate the supply/demand equation. Not just any college or hs player off the street is good enough to play in the minor leagues. Even the ones that will never make to the majors, play at a very high level of skill. After all you need somebody to push and challenge the genuine prospects.
This case attacked baseball from the anti-trust area. The other case attacks from violation of minimum wage laws. Apples and oranges. Anti-trust exemptions allow businesses to coordinate certain actions, it does not confer immunity for other violations (e.g., environmental regulations, wage violations, OSHA issues, etc.)
From the article cited: "On the other hand, even if the Supreme Court does not agree to overturn baseball’s exemption in the San Jose or Miranda suits, that does not mean that the battle for higher minor league wages is doomed. Indeed, Monday’s decision has no bearing on the two cases seeking to challenge MLB’s minor league pay practices under the nation’s minimum wage laws. And while the minimum wage cases face potential challenges of their own, they nevertheless have always had a much stronger chance of success than the Miranda suit in light of baseball’s antitrust immunity."
What I found interesting about the anti-trust angle was while the lower courts are bound by the Supreme Court precedent, it felt as if the plaintiffs were angling to give the Supreme Court a chance to re-examine its judicially created anti-trust exemption. But again, this result has no effect on the other suits.
Originally Posted by Goosegg:
This case attacked baseball from the anti-trust area. The other case attacks from violation of minimum wage laws. Apples and oranges. Anti-trust exemptions allow businesses to coordinate certain actions, it does not confer immunity for other violations (e.g., environmental regulations, wage violations, OSHA issues, etc.)
From the article cited: "On the other hand, even if the Supreme Court does not agree to overturn baseball’s exemption in the San Jose or Miranda suits, that does not mean that the battle for higher minor league wages is doomed. Indeed, Monday’s decision has no bearing on the two cases seeking to challenge MLB’s minor league pay practices under the nation’s minimum wage laws. And while the minimum wage cases face potential challenges of their own, they nevertheless have always had a much stronger chance of success than the Miranda suit in light of baseball’s antitrust immunity."
Right. I think the headline is misleading. Miranda was dismissed. The other suit is still on track to go to trial in early 2017. At least I think. I can find nothing saying that it was also dismissed yesterday.
Originally Posted by SluggerDad:
Well they do have something of a supply and demand problem, but they do not work in a free labor market. The supply/demand curve is greatly distorted by the fact that they have restricted labor mobility. Add to the fact that their employers have cartel rights to set wages and working conditions. As a consequence their employers don't even have to compete with each other for the available labor pool. Rather they collude.
Plus although there is a union that negotiates with that colluding cartel of an employer on their behalf, they have no representation in that union. Indeed, that union frequently colludes with the cartel employers to sell minor league players down the river for the good of its own members (major league players.)
Plus I do think you underestimate the supply/demand equation. Not just any college or hs player off the street is good enough to play in the minor leagues. Even the ones that will never make to the majors, play at a very high level of skill. After all you need somebody to push and challenge the genuine prospects.
All valid points you make and maybe things improve maybe they don't.
At the end of it, if given the choice with total free agency players (outside the very best) will chose the place where they have the greatest chance to make the MLB and nothing else will matter. I imagine that will be some place that has good coaching, a less deep talent base an organization that has a good track record of getting kids to the majors, top notch training facility etc - it won't be the money because there is no money in MiLB.
It is probably helpful to understand the genesis of the exemption so many decades ago.
Originally Posted by Goosegg:
It is probably helpful to understand the genesis of the exemption so many decades ago.
I get it, I have no love for the owners, if they lost the anti trust I won't be upset at all.
Ballplayers have very short life span and they are bad business people. MiBL guys are even less, they are on a dream and will take whatever they have to for a chance. There are how many thousands kids coming out every year wanting a chance to play? I agree that not all can play and most can't...but that doesn't matter because the ones that can still will and there are plenty of others willing to fill the open spots for the dream.