Minor Leaguers and Minimum Wage

[old nurse]

 

The percentage is much higher in the minors:

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/7779279/percentage-foreign-major-league-baseball-players-rises

40  DSL teams makes up more than a significant portion of that number.

[Steve Lein]

 

I think part of the issue is what is included as working hours. Does the bus ride count? Does showing up early for extra work in the cage count? 

 

That's what I have a problem with... It's a salary. Now, they should pay them enough so they can live, but they're bringing in an argument (working hourly) to put this through that shouldn't even be considered in my opinion.

 

It's the player's choice how many "hours" they put in.

[Major League Ready]

 

I'm curious why the employees should take less, and share it with other employees.

 

MLB owners carry almost none of hte risk other business owners do. They get massive subsidies from the government in terms of stadium deals. Now they want a law passed making it legal to treat their employees differently than other employees are treated.

 

The MLBPA is not asking for laws to be passed, saying MLB players should get more of the pie.....

 

I would appreciate an accurate characterization of my position? Most of the solutions I have suggested center around reallocation of the salaries or bonuses being paid by the team and wouldn’t it be nice if the players were willing to contribute a tiny bit of the massive increases they have gotten over the past couple of decades.

 

Why is it a problem to reallocate 10 or even 20% of the bonus money paid to prospects, especially given most of the high bonus players will never make it in MLB. Why are you asking why players should pay when I have provided suggestions that require to player participation? You are showing a very clear bias that prevents a reasonable assessment of the facts and alternative compensation models.

The suggestion that suggested player participation was to take a tiny percentage of the top paid player’s s salaries. Why shouldn’t these extremely fortunate individuals help alleviate the problem? Please explain to me why you object to taking a tiny percentage of a player’s salary why makes literally 400X the average American? Of course, you won’t actually address this question you will comeback with something else and ignore the question.

 

All of the complaining here and most of the articles conveniently ignore the nearly quarter billion/year paid in bonus and then calculate compensation without considering this money. It takes some pretty extreme bias or financial ignorance to represent the compensation without considering the bonus compensation as part of total compensation.

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

I would appreciate an accurate characterization of my position? Most of the solutions I have suggested center around reallocation of the salaries or bonuses being paid by the team and wouldn’t it be nice if the players were willing to contribute a tiny bit of the massive increases they have gotten over the past couple of decades.

 

Why is it a problem to reallocate 10 or even 20% of the bonus money paid to prospects, especially given most of the high bonus players will never make it in MLB. Why are you asking why players should pay when I have provided suggestions that require to player participation? You are showing a very clear bias that prevents a reasonable assessment of the facts and alternative compensation models.

The suggestion that suggested player participation was to take a tiny percentage of the top paid player’s s salaries. Why shouldn’t these extremely fortunate individuals help alleviate the problem? Please explain to me why you object to taking a tiny percentage of a player’s salary why makes literally 400X the average American? Of course, you won’t actually address this question you will comeback with something else and ignore the question.

 

All of the complaining here and most of the articles conveniently ignore the nearly quarter billion/year paid in bonus and then calculate compensation without considering this money. It takes some pretty extreme bias or financial ignorance to represent the compensation without considering the bonus compensation as part of total compensation.

 

Given that owners are even more wealthy, I wonder why we'd ask players to "help" and not just expect businesses to pay living wages. 

 

BTW, minor league hockey players make more than baseball players, and get a free furnished apartment....and yet minor league hockey still exists.

 

It's close to law. I'm sure some of you will be happy when I am barely here anymore....I'm good with that.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Yeah, don't understand this stuff at all.

 

Why does it have to be that pay has to be doled out or compared in an 'hourly' way?  Give them a raise, pay them a salary (that is what they are paid, right?). They can be "exempt" employees right, so this isn't even a worry. 

 

Just give them enough money to live..

 

Technically no (even though I tend to agree with you)... there are standards associated with exempt employees that it would be hard to justify a minor league player as qualifying. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

 At the same time the guys who are just "cannon fodder" have the option to get a real job anytime they chose. 

 

 

Your logic falls short with this statement. This is true of everyone single employed person in this country. It doesn't change labor laws, nor should it.

 

What's missing from this is that these players are highly skilled. None of us can play at that level. There might be one or two people lurking on this site who had. The owners, in the name of the what is best for the game, have essentially colluded to form a strategy that determines which employer said player will work for and how much they get paid (i.e. a draft). That, I might add, is a direct violation of any labor law in this country, and the reason sports gets away with this is because players are allowed to collectively bargain to participate.

 

The problem at the end of the day is that the MLBPA has excluded minor leaguers from voting, and has not taken care of them. This is abuse and greed. Nothing more and nothing less. I'm not saying minor leaguers could make millions, but I don't think that the argument that they can find a job elsewhere flies. That's true of everyone of us, which means that by your logic, everyone one of us could see our employers collude together to decide what we make. 

[Mike Sixel]

Your logic falls short with this statement. This is true of everyone single employed person in this country. It doesn't change labor laws, nor should it.

 

What's missing from this is that these players are highly skilled. None of us can play at that level. There might be one or two people lurking on this site who had. The owners, in the name of the what is best for the game, have essentially colluded to form a strategy that determines which employer said player will work for and how much they get paid (i.e. a draft). That, I might add, is a direct violation of any labor law in this country, and the reason sports gets away with this is because players are allowed to collectively bargain to participate.

 

The problem at the end of the day is that the MLBPA has excluded minor leaguers from voting, and has not taken care of them. This is abuse and greed. Nothing more and nothing less. I'm not saying minor leaguers could make millions, but I don't think that the argument that they can find a job elsewhere flies. That's true of everyone of us, which means that by your logic, everyone one of us could see our employers collude together to decide what we make.

I might be in love with this post.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

 

Echoing Tomj14's post, I don't think housing is generally provided in the minors, except during spring training. They might get placed with host families, although that's often a volunteer service, not necessarily one that is paid for by the teams (and in fact, host families could even charge the players rent).

 

Likewise, meal compensation is just for spring training and road trips. They're largely on their own, except for what they can scavenge in the clubhouse around game times.

 

This, to me at least, is the most mind boggling of all of these decisions.

 

MLB could get away with paying pennies to minor leaguers if they provided housing and food. At that point, there's no "living wage" discussions because MLB is providing living expenses to go with the paltry amount of money most minor leaguers are getting.

 

What's even more mind boggling about this is that I cannot possibly believe that there wouldn't be a competitive advantage to doing so. It eliminates a point of unnecessary stress, which will allow for more concentration on work. It also allows MLB to control player's nutrition, and one cannot possibly tell me that this bad. Given that orgs are spending millions on analytics right now to gain an advantage, I have a tough time understanding why they wouldn't invest an amount that would effectively pro-rate to the yearly equivalent of a utility infielder to gain this advantage. 

 

This is definitely greed, but it's also a poor allocation of resources.

[TheLeviathan]

Good point, you would think with the amount of value otherwise placed on these players by the organization that they would want to provide basic needs to the players. Giving them 15 bucks assures they eat off the dollar menu rather than a good meal.

 

It’d take such a paltry investment and it would be an investment in the health and wellness of real people who are assets to your organization. People whose health and wellness is directly tied to their value to you.

 

I.....just....don’t....get it.

[Mike Sixel]

On the plus side....the language seems to only be about not paying overtime....so it could be worse.

 

Of course, players are still not paid for spring training, or extended spring training, or off season "voluntary activities", among other times they are working....

[Mr. Brooks]

Good point, you would think with the amount of value otherwise placed on these players by the organization that they would want to provide basic needs to the players. Giving them 15 bucks assures they eat off the dollar menu rather than a good meal.

 

It’d take such a paltry investment and it would be an investment in the health and wellness of real people who are assets to your organization. People whose health and wellness is directly tied to their value to you.

 

I.....just....don’t....get it.

The devil's advocate would say that for the most part, the actual prospects got a big enough bonus to pay for housing and nutrition. 90% of these guys are just "filler", that the organization knows has zero chance of contributing to the mlb club, and they don't really care how who or how good the filler is.

[TheLeviathan]

The devil's advocate would say that for the most part, the actual prospects got a big enough bonus to pay for housing and nutrition. 90% of these guys are just "filler", that the organization knows has zero chance of contributing to the mlb club, and they don't really care how who or how good the filler is.

That filler is still important to your overall development process. The money to feed them and house them decently is pennies in the grand budgeting scheme.

[Mr. Brooks]

That filler is still important to your overall development process. The money to feed them and house them decently is pennies in the grand budgeting scheme.

Well if I know anything about billionaires, it's that for the most part they don't really minimize any amount of their money.

Of course, if they viewed it as a profitable investment, they might go for it.

Either they've decided that the money it would take to feed and house the "filler" isn't worth the additional benefit, or they have yet to be presented with the theory.

But, almost none of them are going to do it just because it's the right thing to do.

And that's not just baseball owners.

[TheLeviathan]

I think that's the key: see it as an investment.

 

Im confused how that isnt already the view of these new waves of FO. Seems like a small price to optimize diet and rest.

[old nurse]

 

Given that owners are even more wealthy, I wonder why we'd ask players to "help" and not just expect businesses to pay living wages. 

 

BTW, minor league hockey players make more than baseball players, and get a free furnished apartment....and yet minor league hockey still exists.

 

It's close to law. I'm sure some of you will be happy when I am barely here anymore....I'm good with that.

Minor league hockey has two levels. Less players to pay.  Hockey contracts are also capped at  10% for signing bonus for ecl.  Now if the AHL would be considered AAA and AHL AA/A+  the pay grades for lower minor leagues would follow similar step downs for levels as would the bonuses.  I would think overall this would be a more money for the major league clubs.  Up front costs become minimal rather than up to 400 million available for clubs to spend.

[Guest]

Since this thread started out with reference to the Saints, this BA article is probably of some interest.

 

Since MLB and Congress magnanimously included language indicating players would be paid based on minimum wage for a 40 hour week, they not only get to continue underpaying their own players, but may be putting indy leagues across the country out of business. Those teams have been operating under the assumption that players are seasonal workers and can be paid well below minimum wage.

 

I'd assume the Saints have revenues high enough to stay in the black, but will they have any other teams to line up against?

 

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/save-americas-pastime-act-could-wound-or-kill-indy-leagues/

 

Those minor league execs who have been lobbying on MLB's behalf better pray to God that MLB doesn't turn around and contract in the next couple of years anyway, because they probably aren't going to have the option of aligning in an indy league going forward.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

That filler is still important to your overall development process. The money to feed them and house them decently is pennies in the grand budgeting scheme.

 

yeah, I have to think that Royce Lewis's development will be better suited with a guy like Nik Turley pitching to him than say me.... call me crazy. That filler has value to the organization, and it is not being compensated accordingly.

 

This is where I wish there was a line item veto. It's BS that something like this can be tacked on to a spending bill.

[Rosterman]

It's interesting that the pay is mainly considered for performance (i.e. the actual game) and anytime a player spends working out or prepping is on their own time, so to speak, but still isn't it a necessary part of the job?

 

[TFRazor]

 

As I posted in the other baseball forum, if this passes, I'm done watching or listening to regular season baseball....and might have to stop coming here also. Heck, even if it doesn't pass......they asked for this. Reprehensible behavior. Pure and utter greed, but hey, heavan forbid we pay the minor leaguers real money when the owners are struggling so much just to make their next billion.

 

It's also reprehensible that established major leaguers (who started in the minors just like these guys) are not signing deals because they're being offered 120mil instead of the 130mil they want. That 10mil from one contract could give a significant raise to every minor leaguer on every team. The greed factor cuts both ways.

[Mike Sixel]

 

It's also reprehensible that established major leaguers (who started in the minors just like these guys) are not signing deals because they're being offered 120mil instead of the 130mil they want. That 10mil from one contract could give a significant raise to every minor leaguer on every team. The greed factor cuts both ways.

 

What is reprehensible about that? They aren't conllecting the revenue, and deciding how it is split up. 

 

Do you belive that if a MLB took less money, that the owners would pay their minor league (or other) employees more? Like, one guy says, "I'm going to sign for less money than I think I'm worth...." that the owner will send that money anyplace other than another MLB player or his pocket?

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

It's also reprehensible that established major leaguers (who started in the minors just like these guys) are not signing deals because they're being offered 120mil instead of the 130mil they want. That 10mil from one contract could give a significant raise to every minor leaguer on every team. The greed factor cuts both ways.

Again, the context of this thread is that MLB owners are lobbying for a legal exemption from being challenged on their low (sub-minimum wage?) minor league pay.

 

You may think MLB players are greedy too, but they are not doing that.

[TFRazor]

 

Again, the context of this thread is that MLB owners are lobbying for a legal exemption from being challenged on their low (sub-minimum wage?) minor league pay.

 

You may think MLB players are greedy too, but they are not doing that.

 

You are absolutely correct. MLB players are not doing that. What they are also not doing is making sure that they're minor league brothers are covered by the CBA. I personally think that the owners lobbying for tax exemptions is morally reprehensible considering the amount of money that is made off of these guys. However, saying that the current deplorable situation of minor league pay is completely on the owners is incorrect.

[TFRazor]

 

 

What is reprehensible about that? They aren't conllecting the revenue, and deciding how it is split up. 

 

Do you belive that if a MLB took less money, that the owners would pay their minor league (or other) employees more? Like, one guy says, "I'm going to sign for less money than I think I'm worth...." that the owner will send that money anyplace other than another MLB player or his pocket?

I never claimed that it would fix it. I was responding with a hypothetical solution to your statement on how owners were being "reprehensible". The major leaguers are attempting to maximize their profits, just as the owners are. Personally, I agree that this tax exemption and their reasoning for it is deplorable considering the profits that are made. However, I also find it deplorable that the big leaguers (the one's with all the bargaining power in the CBA) didn't account for their minor league brethren in the last negotiating period. It's not like the lack of pay to the vast majority of minor league players is a new thing. If they would've included the minor league guys in the last CBA, we wouldn't even be having this discussion about fishy politics. If I've gone off topic I apologize but I do feel this is all interconnected.

[Mike Sixel]

 

You are absolutely correct. MLB players are not doing that. What they are also not doing is making sure that they're minor league brothers are covered by the CBA. I personally think that the owners lobbying for tax exemptions is morally reprehensible considering the amount of money that is made off of these guys. However, saying that the current deplorable situation of minor league pay is completely on the owners is incorrect.

 

Agreed, and I've said as much on this thread, I think, or the other one.

[TFRazor]

 

Agreed, and I've said as much on this thread, I think, or the other one.

 

I was responding to just this particular post and not any you may have made before. I'm merely offering what I see as an equally important factor in this equation. My apologies if it seemed I was saying you were wrong. What I'm trying to convey is that this isn't a one-way street if we're apportioning blame for the economics that have made this situation possible. It's morally repugnant that the owners are trying to pass a law that would allow them to save money off of some of the worse paid guys in the sport. This is also an indictment of the Players Union who didn't protect the players who needed it most, the minor leaguers. That is purely what I was trying to get across. I probably just didn't explain it very well.

[Mike Sixel]

I was responding to just this particular post and not any you may have made before. I'm merely offering what I see as an equally important factor in this equation. My apologies if it seemed I was saying you were wrong. What I'm trying to convey is that this isn't a one-way street if we're apportioning blame for the economics that have made this situation possible. It's morally repugnant that the owners are trying to pass a law that would allow them to save money off of some of the worse paid guys in the sport. This is also an indictment of the Players Union who didn't protect the players who needed it most, the minor leaguers. That is purely what I was trying to get across. I probably just didn't explain it very well.

No offense taken!

[Otto von Ballpark]

It's a little tricky, because note that the union is the MLBPA -- that is, the Major League Baseball Player's Association. Should they be representing minor league players too? Perhaps, but I'm not sure it's necessarily "morally repugnant" that they didn't -- they are a pretty modern union, compared to say the Screen Actor's Guild, and minor league concerns weren't really related to the issues around their original formation.

 

Have they bargained away rights of minor leaguers or amateurs? Yes, to a degree, but keep in mind the biggest restriction on U.S. amateurs is the existence of the amateur draft, which predates the MLBPA. They didn't make the draft, although they have agreed to caps on draft bonuses and international amateurs in collective bargaining. Of course, that's only subject to collective bargaining because of the antitrust exemption, which was another legal status sought and maintained by ownership.

 

As to where it stands now, I don't know if it's reasonable to expect the MLBPA to say "we'll take less money so you can give it to the minor leaguers." I think it's far more reasonable to say the owners should be compelled to pay the minor leaguers a minimum wage, and if that means less money for the MLBPA, so be it. If the MLBPA were to complain about that result, I'd have more criticism for them, but at this point it seems ownership should bear the brunt of it.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Wow, what a slimeball move by MLB. There's no excuse for this kind of blatant money-grubbing.

[Major League Ready]

Are the draft slot allocations a product of the CBA?  I find it very difficult to look at a situation where a quarter billion in signing bonuses are paid out and conclude "those greedy owners" are unwilling to pay MiLB players.  This would be incredibly easy to fix. Take half of the bonus money, allocate to wages and you have well-compensated minor league players. What I don't understand why the owners allowed this potential liability to be created. All they needed to do was reallocate the money they are already spending so I have to ask if the bonus structure was negotiated by the other side.  

 

Regardless, to look at this problem and not blame the players equally is a product of fanatical bias against owners because fans love the players. Given the growth of wages, the players could have very easily looked out for  MiLB players but they obviously want every penny too, Somehow, fans conclude players deserve every penny and the owners are greedy which is as absurd as some of the MiLB players playing for scraps and others getting paid millions before they every play in a MLB game.

 

Some of you also equate MiLB pay to normal jobs and suggest players are trapped therefore need minimum wage. They are not trapped. Playing baseball is not their best option. They certainly have the option to do something else and chose not to. They are just delaying the inevitable by a couple years so to suggest the situation is the same as any other minimum wage situation is a big stretch.

[Major League Ready]

 

Wow, what a slimeball move by MLB. There's no excuse for this kind of blatant money-grubbing.

 

Have you stopped to consider it might be necessary to prevent a landslide of lawsuits and buy some time to negotiate a long-term solution with the union. The union will have something to say because paying MiLB players more reduces the "pot" available to MLB salaries. Fans are simply to bias to even consider such things. It's the nature of this type of forum to run with a portion of the information but in this case, fans likely have a tiny fraction of the information. 

 

Perhaps the legal action is centered around preventing an operational nightmare in the form of identifying what is overtime? Everyone here sees and reacts to very surface level implications and there is no doubt more to the story.