Ben Stassen

V435 Dispute system design

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 46
  • Published : December 10, 2014
Open Document

Text Preview
Dylan Simonson
Dispute System Design
Major League Baseball

A) In the MLB (Major League Baseball) like most professionals sports contain a CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) between the owners and the MLBPA (Major League Baseball Players Association) otherwise known as the union of the MLB. The CBA was created in order to resolve all labor/salary disputes as well as setting guidelines for how revenue is shared between the owners and players. The major grievance cases that are covered by the CBA are salary and labor grievances. The MLB has a unique system in which the players are legally bound to a team for 6 years. After 6 years that player has the freedom to become a free agent and sign with any team that provides him with an offer he is willing to take. That being said many players out play their rookie contract and feel that they can be underpaid. This led to the creation of the MLB’s salary Arbitration system. When a player reaches 3 years of Service time that player becomes arbitration eligible. This is a collaborative process between MLBPA and the MLB labor relations department; they jointly select a neutral tripartite panel to supervise the salary arbitration hearing. The process is simple, both the player and the team submit a salary figure prior to the hearing, which allows for an extended time for negotiations. If negotiations continue to falter they continue with the arbitration process. The CBA restricts the arbitrator’s decision by providing that “The arbitration panel shall be limited to awarding only one or the other of the two figures submitted.”[1] The arbitrators make every effort to issue a decision within 24 hours of the hearing. After this the arbitrators for the case send out the awarded salary to both the player and the team, this figure is final.

C) (This is the link to the MLB’s CBA. On page 17 is the provisions for salary arbitration.)

A) I firmly believe that the current process the MLB follows is a great system for resolving salary disputes. This system takes care of both the player and the team’s greatest interests. Not only does this system have a clear and concise procedure but also it is cost and time effective. The arbitration process is split evenly by the parties and takes between 24-72 hours on most cases. A major advantage of the process is that the hearing is concluded prior to spring training allowing the player and team to take care of any disputes, this allows for minimal distractions.

B) Although I believe in the current system that the MLB follows there are still weaknesses in the process. The major problem with the current process is that the arbitrators really have no opinion in the case. They are presented with two figures and issue an award to only one or the other of the two figures submitted. In this system there is less room for interpretation of the play of that particular player the past year. If there is a major gap in the two figures submitted one of the sides will get spurned which may cause a rift in the relationship.

A&B) The first part of the new DSD for the MLB’s labor/salary disputes will be similar to the previous system. If a player feels that negotiations will not come to fruition then that player must file for salary arbitration by a certain date to be arbitration eligible. Obviously this player must have the requisite service time as well. The new system will contain a hybrid advisory arbitration, allowing for more freedom in which the arbitrators can award a figure other than the two that were submitted. If the team and player do happen to reach an agreement on salary or a long-term contract extension prior to the panel reaching a decision than they may withdraw from the process. If they do not reach an agreement the hearing will commence. In the case that both parties feel they can come to a fair agreement after the hearing, they may open up negotiations...