Milb can't afford to pay players minimum wage

Fascinating! http://www.statista.com/statis...jor-league-baseball/

 

In 2014 the starting minimum wage a MLB player got was 500K per year!

In 2014 the starting minimum wage a MiLB player got was $25,800 (if they were lucky enough to be AAA!)

 

Does anyone else see the massive gap?  We all know that many AAA players are more talented and frankly at the top of their game than 50% of the MLB players...so if the skill level isn't determining the pay-scale, what is? 

 

Why not bump the starting salary of a MLB player back down to what it was in oh, 2004?  Which would be 300K, that should help solve the problem!  But oh wait, MLB has the union fighting for them, they won't accept a pay deduction...gee if only the MiLB union would get on board with this fight...oh yeah THEY DON"T HAVE ONE!

 

My kid showed me an interesting definition last night, not that it has ANY relevance to this discussion....*wink-wink*

 

Indentured servitude was a labor system where by young people paid for their passage to the New World by working for an employer for a certain number of years. After working for the term of the contract (traditionally seven years) the servant was then free to farm or take up trade of his own..Both sides were legally obligated to meet the terms, which were enforced by local American courts.It is the legal basis of the apprenticeship system by which skilled trades were learned.

 

 

I don't feel it's really difficult to figure what their salary should be to meet minimum wage requirements.  We know salaried people in any occupation very often work may more hours than a 40 hr week and get paid nothing more for it.  So I'd say just base the salary on a 40hr week.  And based on a 40 hr week, the players at the bottom rungs are pair less that a $7.50 minimum wage.  It's these players at the bottom rungs that are the one's to be addressed, not those who's had enough time in the league and/or have moved to a level where the salary exceeds such a minimum wage salary base.

 

There can be about 100 players of a total 150 in an organization's farm system who are at those bottom rung levels of salary.  About 1/3 of that 100 has been drafted and signed in the top 10 rounds, giving them a financial cushion that the other players don't have.  But in terms on monthly salaries, it'd have to be applied equally.  So their bonuses are not a consideration.  Just to get some idea of what it might cost an organization to increase the low end salaries to meet a minimum wage rate of $7.50, let's use the number of 100 players it might affect who receive say $1,150 month (40 hr week at $6.63 hr) for a 6 month season.  Not taking into account the employer's portion of taxes that they have to pay for employee's earnings, that would equate to a payroll of about $6,900,000 for a season.  If the lowest monthly salary was raised to say $1,400 (a little over $8hr for a 40hr week), that would raise their payroll to $8,400,000. . .an additional $1,500,000 per season.   In terms of total cash flow for an organization, amount of increase is easily manageable for even the poorest of MLB organizations.

 

I think my calculation for this additional amount is on the high side as of those 100 players, there are those who salaries increase each year as they stay in the system, yet remain below that minimum wage rate.  And yes, about 1/3 of them don't really need a salary increase do to signing bonuses, but as I mentioned the salary arrangements can't take that into account (or should it?).

 

And we all know these organizations never really pay for such things anyway.  Additional costs are ultimately passed on to the consumer so it's those that buy the tickets and paraphernalia that pay.  Right?

 

Bottom line is that they can easily do it if they wanted to, but status quo is preferable to them.  They're just not going to do it unless they're made to do it.  

 

 

Minor league owners are not affected by player's wages. The parent club ways wages. Over the past forty years inflation is 400%. Minor league wages have increased only 75%.

The reality is 84% of American MLB players come from the top ten rounds of the draft. These players sign six and seven figure signing bonuses. There's probably a perception by MLB owners most of the players who will make the majors are well taken care of.

Yeah, that would seem reasonable think that.  But . . . the issue is not about that.  Though I guess that perception could very well be why the MLB owners have been apathetic about it.

Tracking hours is just a bookkeeping "problem." There are many jobs which require heading to a pickup location and then getting on a bus to be driven to the job. Wage and hour rules will dictate how that is paid. In fact, I bet that MLB's outside counsel who travel to cities outside their home base have pretty much figured out a system to charge MLB for that travel time - and I bet MLB pays it. (Thereby pretty much destroying the argument, "wah, wah, wah, it's too hard to figure out.")

 

The issue has nothing to do with the difficulty of calculating the number of hours worked (in season bus rides, games, out of season spring training and instructs, and the contractual requirements that the players maintain themselves in top physical condition in the off season without getting paid). Wage regulations have grown to cover all these types of issues. 

 

Paying a "salary" doesn't allow an employer to pay less than minimum wage. The employee must be an "exempt" employee. MLB knows this because the DOL is investigating that tactic. http://www.fairwarning.org/wp-.../10/Sept.-12memo.pdf

 

Nothing the players do is unique in the eyes of state Employment Departments. What is unique is they don't get paid for the bulk of their time in season, and don't get paid at all for contractually required activities performed in the off season. 

 

If they are not successful in court the only recourse they have is obviously to organize (unionize).

They would have to convince those who received significant signing bonuses (six, seven figures) to unionize. Those players could see unionizing as a detriment to their future with little to gain.

JMO, I agree with the premise that milb is not intended to be a long time career but rather an apprenticeship.  A  majority of the players drafted in first 10 rounds each year are those that have been awarded a significant bonus to help them through what may be some lean years in milb and those that the organization prefer will someday become part of the ML staff.

 

Those that become career milb players and have become free agents get paid very well.

 

In many organizations AAA 40 man players are pulled up regularly to the club so that they can make extra money. AAA players are generally treated very well.

 

Remember the higher up you go the more you pay in dues.

 

For those that will become later signees, make sure that college becomes your first priority.

 

 

And you'll find that apprentices typically earn much greater than the minimum wage . . .particularly those in a skill occupation.

Look and see what the support staffs make in these organizations...

I dont know exactly but as far as I was made to understand managers and coaches as well as trainers, etc. on the milb level dont get paid a whole heck of a lot either.

While I am in favor of higher wages and understand the implications that a milb player is paid  less than minimum wage most on this particular job will never have a career in MLB.  When a player signs an agreement to play in this situation was he not made aware of the circumstances of his employment? 
Seriously what is a better option for a player just out of HS with no bonus money or no scholarship fund given to him?
It certainly is not choosing a career as a milb player.

When college students do their apprenticeships before they earn a degree are these students paid?

I like the way the NBA and NFL do it.
Why not make two years of college mandatory requirement for baseball players?  Make the NCAA give full scholarships.  Draft less players each year and pay them more. Heck lets just cut out half of each teams minor league system and pay each player more!  What great ideas these are?!?!

Dont get me wrong I definitely agree that the other 20 members on each team should get paid higher wages for helping to support those very few who will go on to play for the big club.

Dropping a ML players salary from 500 to 300 is amusing.  I think that most people who have never had anyone in that situation would not understand.  Understand the whole process before you speak up and how it works helps.  Once that minimum MLB wage earner goes up to the club do you know how many more years it will be until he has the ability to make more?  

 

Why not just revamp  MLB ?

 

Dont get me wrong folks, I have a player that has been struggling with the lower wages that milb pays for much of the last 5-6 years.   He never once complained and I have not either.  

 

BTW, know you know why most older milb players (most with former mlb experience though) gravitate south in winter.  They make in a month what milb players might make all season.

 

Reality is (and I have had to have this discussion with my own), these days especially, if you are still in the system by AAA or even AA and not made the 40, chances are you never will.  It is your choice to remain in the system as an "indentured slave" or move on.

 

The only players that I do feel significantly bad for are the latins that do come here with no bonus (or a bonus that has been cut by the guys that represent them).  

The job description of a typical minor league baseball player is to serve as an acceptable teammate and opponent for the MLB prospects.  Lots of people are capable of doing this job.

 

There is an abundant supply of replacement level minor leaguers willing to work for low wages either out of a hope they will prove the organization wrong and emerge as a prospect or a love of the game.

 

Any activity that millions of people love doing enough to do it for free will have a glut of people clamoring to accept whatever entry level paid positions exist on whatever terms are offered.

 

Why does the New York Times pay only $25 to the writers of its daily crossword puzzles? Because there are thousands of skilled and clever crossword puzzle writers who would let their creations be published for free if only Will Short would answer their emails.

 

Why do community orchestras and choruses and theaters not pay or pay only minimal amounts to their fabulously talented musicians and actors? Because thousands of other similarly talented people are willing to log however many hours of unpaid practice it takes to garner the same opportunity.

 

Supply drives down the price of labor in occupations people love except at the most rarefied levels of talent.

 

Well said. Not sure why some dont get that concept.

The fallacy in his argument is that it assumes that there is somewhere, somehow, a huge pool of untapped talent who are in line and are good enough to play.

 

Nothing could be further from the truth. MLB actions demonstrate the fallacy; every club has a large number of people devoted to scouring the country looking into every nook and cranny for what is perceived as "potential." If the clubs could simply put out a "help wanted" sign for companion ponies for the thoroughbreds, and that action produced those companions, clubs would do it (because of the huge cost savings). The fact that the overwhelming number of those who make it are from the first 10 rounds does nothing to prove that the remaining draftees (and the few FAs signed after the draft) match the talent of this huge pool of equally talented (yet undrafted) companion ponies.

 

Look at the draft; look at the guys not drafted. The best hitters, best fielders, best pitchers, best players (either because of their actual production or because of a scout's ability to pierce the kids present production and peer into the future development) are the ones taken.  While I have seen parents, players, coaches, and assorted pundits claim that a player drafted was inferior to one who wasn't, I have NEVER heard the scout who was responsible for drafting that player agree (except in rare economic situations) with that assessment (at the time of the draft) - the clubs might draft a lesser "player" in a few instances due to economics, but the club sees something in the player (otherwise why spend the time and money in scouting that player).

 

As for the argument that the players are "apprentices," I would urge those who believe that claim to read the definition of the narrow categories exempt from minimum wage. The MILB players do not fall in that category (indeed, these players are, with the exception of those higher in the chain, amongst the most skilled in baseball in the world - before they even get drafted).

 

Over time, we have been over the "they knew what they we getting into" assertion. That is a smoke screen; Public Policy (society's determination that an employer must pay a minimum wage) trumps an employee's ability to accept - and an employer's ability to pay - less then society has deemd as a minimum (with narrow exemptions which are at the core of MLB's defense).

 

Apart from the law, MLB has chosen (IMO) to short-sightedly place immediate cost savings (expressed by the low wage) over long term develoment which could be enhanced through better nutrition, better personal physical training in the off season, etc. I have no ability to quantify or research whether there would be any long term difference if players were able to eat and train better; the reason for this inability is that EVERY CLUB MUST adhere to the same wage rule. It's too bad that even if a club wanted to pay its milb players minimum wage, no club would be allowed to do it. 

Goosegg, 

 

I disagree.  MLB actions scream confirmation of my assertion that there are a lot more players capable of playing in the minor leagues than there are roster spots for them.

 

Once you get past the true major league prospects--the players for whom the entire scouting and development apparatus is designed to identify, sign, and nurture--minor league players are treated as a disposable and endlessly renewable resource.  The clubs deliberately create a lot of churn among the non-prospect, replacement level minor leaguers.

 

They want to do this because it increases the probability of identifying a previously overlooked gem.  

 

They can do this because there are so many players who are capable of playing minor league ball.  

 

Look how many drafted players are released after two or three years, even though they had decent stats in rookie, low A, and A ball.  

 

 

If you don't believe me, advise a mid or late-round pick or a 22 year old designated as a senior sign to hold out for $1,000 more than the MLB club plans to spend on him.  He'll find out in about five minutes that he is very replaceable.

 

This is probably the only part of what you wrote that I agree with . . . yet, it too is a Logical Fallacy with regards to your argument about the issue.

 

I  don't know who knows what a logical fallacy is, but the argument you're making is just full of them. (e.g. millions of people able and willing to do it for free; writer, musicians or other willing to do thing for "minimal amounts")  

 

And though there are those who might agree with using logical fallacy types of arguments, that does't validate the argument either.

 

What would happen if Milb actually tried to operate on a volunteer basis (since there are "millions" able to play in the Milb), where those who are not "Prospects" are unpaid volunteers?    If that would work, Milb would probably be doing it.   So, if Milb can't get enough of them to help with the development of the MLB Prospects,  they they need to use part time paid employees who get at least the minimum wage.  

 

If people are needed to be hired to do a any particular job, the employer needs to pay them the minimum pay/wage that ALL people should be subject to by law.  

 

It's hard to get the slave owners to give up having "slaves" since that would change things so drastically.  

Truman, 

 

Before you accuse someone of offering a fallacious argument, you might want to make sure he's even making an argument.

 

I wasn't. I offered no opinion on the justness/rightness/fairness of the current compensation system, and I advanced no proposals for improving it.

 

All I did was point out what the supply-demand balance looks like for the majority of minor league baseball players, the ones who were hired not because their employers thought they might become MLB players but because their employers need them to be teammates for the guys who are MLB prospects.  I was simply explaining one reason MiLB players have no leverage--they are easily replaced.

 

If I were to make an argument about the current compensation system, it might begin with a rant about how outrageous it is that the MLB owners and the MLBPA negotiated into their CBA the terms under which MLB would hire non-union minor league players--most of whom have no realistic hope of ever joining the MLBPA and enjoying any benefits of that CBA.

Ok, call them "interns" and there you go! You can get away with paying them next to nothing! Everybody else does! 

Interns at Goggle earn $6,000 per mo. Plus free food.

That's right!   

 

For many years, I used to do premium audits for worker's compensation insurance companies where I reviewed details of various company's total payroll. . . got to see who gets paid what and how at various levels in Silicon Valley.  It was very common to see interns earning quite sizable wages/salaries for skilled or higher educated positions.  And I never saw any at the lowest levels get anything less the minimum wage; in fact, it was rare to see "interns" get that low of pay.

       
       
Perhaps a little sad.  But a lot true.  People should also realize that this little time in the minors does open doors for some.  How many guys are now making at least a decent living doing instruction or running travel organizations etc. Just because they were a 'pro' ball player.  Personally I wish they made minimum wage but even if they don't there are a lot of benefits they get out of it even if it is just the satisfaction of having given it their best shot.

This is why unions are a necessity for fair play. Year ago I was a musician. In LA, every gig was a union gig. If you played a club you got a minimum of $300/nt ($600 if you were the "front man"). However, I moved to Nashville where you couldn't throw a rock without hitting a pro-level talented musician. Getting paid much at all to play a gig there was a miracle and many clubs paid the musicians ZERO. They played for tips. Why? Because there were a thousand musicians willing to take their place in a second and willing to play for free. Heck, on any given night there might be 200 of those types in the audience. Difference between LA (where there were also a plentiful supply of talented musicians) and Nashville? No union in Nashville.

That would be "yearsago."

I know I am late to answer this question, but the answer is yes and no. There are two types of internships (apprenticeships are similar) - paid and unpaid. Unpaid interns are, in order to avoid laws requiring minimum wage, not allowed to do the actual work of another. They can shadow someone and they can do work under their direction, but if the work they do as an unpaid intern is work that would otherwise have been done by a paid employee, then it does not fall under the definition of "intern" and is illegal. For example, someone interns with the District Attorney's office, and they let him habdle a case as an unpaid intern while the DDA who would have handled the case supervises him and walks him through it - no problem. However, if the DA's office hands the intern cases while the DDA that would have handled the case moves on to complete other work, the intern is actually providing free hours that would have, by necessity, been picked up by paid employees. That isn't allowed. That's what MiLB does. They aren't apprentices learning their trade under paid employees who do the same work and are supervising them. They ARE the product. Minor League teams are paying at the turnstiles to see a minor league product on the field. They aren't apprentices or employees. By definition, they are employees who are illegally underpaid.

As this wanders into the spectrum of legal and macro economic discussion ponder this:

 

Wages and the standard of living in the US will not improve until the rest of the world approaches our standard of living and are not willing to do the same job for less.  Which is why just about every shoe is made in Asia since Nixon.  Also applies to a 1,000 other things.

 

Same argument being made here in multiple ways over baseball, music, Silicon valley and burger flippers - who want $15 an hour by the way in certain places.

 

There are two exceptions to this basic economic fact - equity or skill.  If you have either then gravity does not apply

The milb teams do not pay the salaries, the ML team does. It has nothing to do with how much money they make.  And from what I understand this isnt really a topic of conversation among the players, most if not all are happy to be playing, and they know at anytime it can end for them.  I think its very hard for anyone to understand this unless they have been involved with the game.  Its easy to understand why when a player reaches free agency he shoots for the moon. 

 

Its also pretty eye opening that you can leave the game and survive without it. 

 

Son never complained about the pay. However, these guys go south to play and get paid LOTS of money for their services in comparison to what you made in milb, not to mention your room and board covered as well. Americans are paid very well and appreciated for their efforts. Its a tough life living far from home in a strange place, but its also a life experience.

 

No amount of money son ever received could have prepared him to be who he is because of his bb experiences.

 

Do I think they should get paid more, yes, will this make them better ball players, definitely not!

 

MLB gets away with the low pay because the players have no bargaining position after they get drafted and/or sign their first contract. If Milb players could switch teams at any time the pay and opportunities would be much better.  Even interns can switch employers and/or can even choose the organization they wish to work for.  At our accounting firm we paid our part time HS intern more then my son playing a full season of MiLB.    

In fairness what degrees do the Interns at Google either have or are working towards?  My bet is a degree that not very many want or can achieve. 

 

My son is in the process of getting a Masters in Electrical Engineering . He will be an intern at Intel this summer but there are not a bunch of people clamoring to become Electrical Engineers.  

You know that the player signs a contract binding him to that team for what might seem forever. The team also signs it, but has the right to let him go at anytime not ever fulfilling that contract.  

So not only do they not get paid well, but essentially they have signed over their right to not being able to leave when they want to. That should be a bigger issue.

 

I would like to see a restructure of the system. After 4 years for a player drafted out of college or 5 for a HS player, if they have not made the 40 they should have an opportunity to become a FA, even if still with the team they are currently with, this allows them more opportunity for more money.

 

Just thinking out loud.

Tpm 

Wasnt that the time line before the MLB players union  bargained that away?

 

Im sure it takes special people who get internship

it also takes special men to play pro ball...some of you make it sound like these players are a dime a doz. .... Then everyone's son on this web site should be drafted

Not sure if that once was.
Good post.
Hope the family is doing well.

FWIW,

I have known njbb since our sons graduated HS (or maybe before). Her son signed after HS mine while in college. Different paths. That was just about 11 years ago. There are a few more websters here whose sons played or still play pro ball that I have known for a very long time, funny thing is we rarely if ever discussed the negatives of not making enough money in milb.

I don't ever remember discussing or complaining about the pay our sons received or didn't receive.

 

She makes a very good point, it takes special people to get lucrative internships as well as those that get chosen to play professional ball.  In life you can do one of two things, you can do what you have to do to make it or walk away and take your efforts elsewhere. If your son is good or healthy enough to reach the 25 man roster at one point, keep in mind that most are not, the lack of pay in milb will not be important.  If your son plans on making this his life career, more than likely it is NOT going to happen.

 

Here is the deal, if drafted after HS and player decided to sign, decide whether that bonus would be able to sustain you for 4-5 years and negotiate a lucrative scholarship plan (remember college tuition is on the rise and won't be in 5 years or more what it is today) OR go to college get a degree. In other words have a plan B.

 

If you as a parent feel that the pay is unacceptable, and that you can't support him, then don't encourage him to follow the dream.  Steer him towards becoming a doctor or lawyer, or some other more lucrative profession (not that you don't have to struggle to reach those goals as well).  My brother told me that while in med school he lived at burgers and egg salad, then in Guadalajara he lived on beans and rice. 

 

JMO

 

 

One thing to remember about that mlb scholarship money (in addition to inflation reducing its value) is that the money received is taxable.

 

I don't think the issue is raising pay in general for low minor players, or if the career path is one that can be done by other unknown, undiscovered, untapped talent; or if below minimum wage wages are part of the elaborate development system; it's about complying with public policy (i.e., the law).

 

The entire country has a floor on what must be paid (most states have higher floors). Unless the business comes within an exemption, it's game over.

 

The primary exemption upon which mlb relies is the seasonal exemption; we'll see if an exemption intended to cover unskilled teenagers working as summer life guards, summer carnival ride operators, church camps, and the like can be shoehorned to cover employees who (a) have year round contractual duties, (b) cannot apply for unemployment compensation (unlike those who actually work for the summer and are then terminated), and (c) receive no compensation for clearly required duties (e.g., spring training, extended). 

 

If MLB loses, it's no big deal. It pays in the future what it should have been paying all along (like the recent cases about NFL cheer leaders); it pays the wages it owes for years not barred by the statute of limitations, plus perhaps 100% in statutory penalties (like the cheer leader cases), and, of course, legal fees. MLBs only real downside are legal fees and the statutory penalty - a pittance to them. So, it may as well fight.

 

 

 

 

Correct it is taxable. However if the college program wants all of their players to graduate they will do what they have to help the player. This is a good question to ask when a player has the opportunity to sign after HS.

I dont disagree with anything you have stated. Some teams do take better care of  their players than others.  Seems to be an issue when one team feeds their players well and the others with pb&j.
Its not the same across the board.

I believe they will put up the good fight..and win.

Correct it is taxable. However if the college program wants all of their players to graduate they will do what they have to help the player. This is a good question to ask when a player has the opportunity to sign after HS.

I dont disagree with anything you have stated. Some teams do take better care of  their players than others.  Seems to be an issue when one team feeds their players well and the others with pb&j.
Its not the same across the board.

I believe they will put up the good fight..and win.

I believe the MLB players get a portion of the income from the sale of MLB merchandise.

Why don't the MiLB players get the same for their merchandise.?

I dont remember ever seeing players names on licensed stuff in the team milb stores.

 

Federal judge has denied MLBs request to move the venue of the minimum wage suit to Florida. The suit stays in California. http://harvardjsel.com/2015/02...cures-small-victory/