Minor Leaguers to get a Raise

[Seth Stohs]

A Minnesotan has been working on Twitter to help minor leaguers... On Twitter he's "Adopt a MiLB Player" (or something like that... 

 

Sports Illustrated did a story on him (https://www.si.com/mlb/2020/03/17/adopt-a-minor-leaguer-program) that tells a little about him but more about what he's tried to do.

 

I know he has paired several Twins minor leaguers with some Twins fans... 

 

https://www.si.com/mlb/2020/03/17/adopt-a-minor-leaguer-program

 

[biggentleben]

 

A Minnesotan has been working on Twitter to help minor leaguers... On Twitter he's "Adopt a MiLB Player" (or something like that... 

 

Sports Illustrated did a story on him (https://www.si.com/mlb/2020/03/17/adopt-a-minor-leaguer-program) that tells a little about him but more about what he's tried to do.

 

I know he has paired several Twins minor leaguers with some Twins fans... 

 

https://www.si.com/mlb/2020/03/17/adopt-a-minor-leaguer-program

Eric Sims has been pushing his program significantly. It's sad that this is what we consider part of the minor league experience, but at least someone is doing something...

[laloesch]

 

It's still a disgrace how low minor league players salaries are.

No it's not. What's a disgrace is what our enlisted private first class military brothers and sisters get paid in the army. Keep in mind they don't play a game and risk their lives in training (especially if your a paratrooper) and on deployment for just barely 500 dollars a week, 24-27k a year on average. THAT is a "disgrace."

[mlhouse]

 

The article is absolutely "right on". I could add similar accounts but Benjamin Chase has really done the job correctly. The dream is real, the pay is a classic case of exploitive behavior. 

 So, you believe that the minor league baseball player is "exploited"?  In what way?  Do they not have a choice ?  PLAY FOR THE CEDAR RAPIDS CORNSHUCKERS or ELSE.

 

I live in Ft Myers Beach and I go to a few Miracle games a year.  I do find it interesting to wonder why some of the players keep plugging away at it even when the evidence is pretty certain that they will never reach the big leagues. 

 

IN the end, I think for a lot of the players who did not get a signing bonus so they live on their minor league baseball earnings is it is a chance to get to play a game as a profession for a few more years; it is what they know and what they are good at.  Most of them were probably the best player on their team every year until they got to at least the college level.  I know other kids who did this in other sports, playing minor league hockey in the ECHL and other low level minor leagues.  Making $20-25k/year.  

 

But, in the end, given their actual alterantives and evaluating every parameter in their own subjective way, that is the choice they made.  They could have went back to school to finish their degrees.  They could have taken a job at an accounting firm.  They could have went and worked construction.  But they made the choices they made.  That is freedom.

[biggentleben]

 

No it's not. What's a disgrace is what our enlisted private first class military brothers and sisters get paid in the army. Keep in mind they don't play a game and risk their lives in training (especially if your a paratrooper) and on deployment for just barely 500 dollars a week, 24-27k a year on average. THAT is a "disgrace."

Cannot both be true?!

[biggentleben]

 

 

 So, you believe that the minor league baseball player is "exploited"?  In what way?  Do they not have a choice ?  PLAY FOR THE CEDAR RAPIDS CORNSHUCKERS or ELSE.

 

I live in Ft Myers Beach and I go to a few Miracle games a year.  I do find it interesting to wonder why some of the players keep plugging away at it even when the evidence is pretty certain that they will never reach the big leagues. 

 

IN the end, I think for a lot of the players who did not get a signing bonus so they live on their minor league baseball earnings is it is a chance to get to play a game as a profession for a few more years; it is what they know and what they are good at.  Most of them were probably the best player on their team every year until they got to at least the college level.  I know other kids who did this in other sports, playing minor league hockey in the ECHL and other low level minor leagues.  Making $20-25k/year.  

 

But, in the end, given their actual alterantives and evaluating every parameter in their own subjective way, that is the choice they made.  They could have went back to school to finish their degrees.  They could have taken a job at an accounting firm.  They could have went and worked construction.  But they made the choices they made.  That is freedom.

Major League Baseball uses the minor league players to funnel a multi-billion dollar profit machine and tries to push the responsibility for funding that machine off on towns and teams in the minors rather than their own pocket books.

 

It's akin to the crashing beef prices currently as prices for a steak in grocery stores is skyrocketing. The disconnect is notable if you know what you're looking at.

 

Did you read the piece?

[Mr. Brooks]

So, you believe that the minor league baseball player is "exploited"? In what way? Do they not have a choice ? PLAY FOR THE CEDAR RAPIDS CORNSHUCKERS or ELSE.

 

I live in Ft Myers Beach and I go to a few Miracle games a year. I do find it interesting to wonder why some of the players keep plugging away at it even when the evidence is pretty certain that they will never reach the big leagues.

 

IN the end, I think for a lot of the players who did not get a signing bonus so they live on their minor league baseball earnings is it is a chance to get to play a game as a profession for a few more years; it is what they know and what they are good at. Most of them were probably the best player on their team every year until they got to at least the college level. I know other kids who did this in other sports, playing minor league hockey in the ECHL and other low level minor leagues. Making $20-25k/year.

 

But, in the end, given their actual alterantives and evaluating every parameter in their own subjective way, that is the choice they made. They could have went back to school to finish their degrees. They could have taken a job at an accounting firm. They could have went and worked construction. But they made the choices they made. That is freedom.

Exploited does not mean forcing someone against their will.

[laloesch]

 

Cannot both be true?!

 

Why?  They play ball 8 months out of the year so it's not even a full year, full-time. By the time they make it to AAA they are making 700 dollars a week.  That's really not that bad and I'm ignoring the fact that many of the better ones signed multi million dollar bonuses.  Many of them aren't hurting at all to be honest. If it's so bad than the players union is to blame for agreeing to the terms.  

[mlhouse]

 

Exploited does not mean forcing someone against their will.

 

 

Then it means nothing.   Minor league baseball players play the game for a lot of reasons.  How they evaluate those reasons is a purely subjective issue, not objective were your opinion matters.

 

If they had an alterative that they felt was better, that is what they would choose.

 

You can only exploit people without freedom of choice.

[Mr. Brooks]

Then it means nothing. Minor league baseball players play the game for a lot of reasons. How they evaluate those reasons is a purely subjective issue, not objective were your opinion matters.

 

If they had an alterative that they felt was better, that is what they would choose.

 

You can only exploit people without freedom of choice.

No, again, that's not what exploit means.

Perhaps you are thinking of a different word altogether?

 

People have a choice to buy or not buy a bottle of hand sanitizer, but it's still exploitative to sell it for $70 a bottle during a crisis.

[Mr. Brooks]

Why? They play ball 8 months out of the year so it's not even a full year, full-time. By the time they make it to AAA they are making 700 dollars a week. That's really not that bad and I'm ignoring the fact that many of the better ones signed multi million dollar bonuses. Many of them aren't hurting at all to be honest. If it's so bad than the players union is to blame for agreeing to the terms.

They don't have a union.

[biggentleben]

Why? They play ball 8 months out of the year so it's not even a full year, full-time. By the time they make it to AAA they are making 700 dollars a week. That's really not that bad and I'm ignoring the fact that many of the better ones signed multi million dollar bonuses. Many of them aren't hurting at all to be honest. If it's so bad than the players union is to blame for agreeing to the terms.

I did all that math for you in the piece. I’ll give you a hint, a PFC makes more than a AAA player. Seriously, you’re raising stuff I covered directly in the piece.

[mlhouse]

 

No, again, that's not what exploit means.
Perhaps you are thinking of a different word altogether?

People have a choice to buy or not buy a bottle of hand sanitizer, but it's still exploitative to sell it for $70 a bottle during a crisis.

 

Since you have a choice, it is not exploitation.   No one has to buy a bottle of hand sanitizer for $70.  There are tons of substitutes, including not buying.  These are fictions people who believe that minor league baseball players are "exploited" want to tell themselves.

 

The work-leisure trade off is a totally subjective choice function were a person evaluates all of the factors and information available to them and makes a decision.  Maybe you chose your job because it is closer to your home and allowed you to spend more time with your family.  Maybe another person chose their job because it paid just so damn well.  Maybe a kid who was a 40th round draft pick in the MLB draft just wants to have a couple of more years of fun playing baseball in the summer before they finish up their teaching credentials and get a real job.  Maybe another kid who was a 42nd round pick thinks they are just underrated and they will make the major leagues.  

 

One person values one aspect of the trade off differently than another.  But, in the end, they chose the course they take because in their subjective view it is the best alternative amongst those taht are available.  

[laloesch]

 

I did all that math for you in the piece. I’ll give you a hint, a PFC makes more than a AAA player. Seriously, you’re raising stuff I covered directly in the piece.

Is that private first class civilian (tongue in cheek) or private in the army?  Because a private in the army makes less than a AAA ball player.  That's a fact.

[laloesch]

 

They don't have a union.

I never said they had a union. But Tony Clarke could have said more than "it's a start but there's a long way to go before these young players are being compensated and treated fairly.". 

 

Pretty pathetic. Where was this concern back in 2016 the last time MLBPA negotiated with MLB baseball. They could have made a bigger deal about their minor league brethren then.

[big dog]

 

Is that private first class civilian (tongue in cheek) or private in the army?  Because a private in the army makes less than a AAA ball player.  That's a fact.

Are you including the value of housing, food, medical, etc?

[biggentleben]

 

Is that private first class civilian (tongue in cheek) or private in the army?  Because a private in the army makes less than a AAA ball player.  That's a fact.

 

I'm simply talking the $24-27K number you mentioned. Once again, your arguments (big bonuses, not full time, etc.) are addressed in the piece I linked. It was a fairly exhaustive work putting together plenty of numbers from inside and outside baseball.

[biggentleben]

 

 

I never said they had a union. But Tony Clarke could have said more than "it's a start but there's a long way to go before these young players are being compensated and treated fairly.". 

 

Pretty pathetic. Where was this concern back in 2016 the last time MLBPA negotiated with MLB baseball. They could have made a bigger deal about their minor league brethren then.

 

This has been discussed. I left it out of the piece because it's really worth its own piece altogether, though I mention a major reason for it in the article. The commissioner is supposed to be an independent arbiter when CBA negotiations come to play. Many owners have held that they never had a strong leader like Marvin Miller over the years and blamed that on the commissioner's office, when they really could have united to hire a single lawyer/firm to represent them. Instead, once Giamatti died and Vincent really couldn't get out of his own way with multiple issues in the public eye, the owners put one of their own in the seat. His replacement has acted in the same manner as Selig, working the New York offices as an extension of ownership rather than an independent body that represents the interests of all parties involved (players, owners, media, etc.).

 

That has led to negotiations where the players are significantly disadvantaged from the word go because the league offices are slanted against the players. In order to get any concessions from owners, they must give up huge on their side. Fighting for players who are not part of their union is going to be something to be tossed aside quickly.

 

Here's the issue, though: the MLB players shouldn't have to fight for their MiLB brethren. As I mentioned in the article, minor league payer play is, and always has been, and ownership issue, not something that should ever need to be negotiated in the CBA. There is an entirely separate document that dictates the relationship of MLB and MiLB, and that has dictated since its origination in the 1960s that MLB, through its member organizations, were responsible for the salaries of all players in the minor league baseball system.

[biggentleben]

 

 

Since you have a choice, it is not exploitation.   No one has to buy a bottle of hand sanitizer for $70.  There are tons of substitutes, including not buying.  These are fictions people who believe that minor league baseball players are "exploited" want to tell themselves.

 

The work-leisure trade off is a totally subjective choice function were a person evaluates all of the factors and information available to them and makes a decision.  Maybe you chose your job because it is closer to your home and allowed you to spend more time with your family.  Maybe another person chose their job because it paid just so damn well.  Maybe a kid who was a 40th round draft pick in the MLB draft just wants to have a couple of more years of fun playing baseball in the summer before they finish up their teaching credentials and get a real job.  Maybe another kid who was a 42nd round pick thinks they are just underrated and they will make the major leagues.  

 

One person values one aspect of the trade off differently than another.  But, in the end, they chose the course they take because in their subjective view it is the best alternative amongst those taht are available.  

 

There is no 42nd round. Hasn't been for a decade. However, you apparently believe all the players do is show up and play ball. That's not at all NEAR what is done. Trey Harris of the Braves organization quoted me 81 hours per week, though he did say that he spent roughly 12-15 hours of that on his own accord doing video review and cage/defense work on his own because he's a video junkie and relentless in improving. However, that still means that he was spending 66 hours per week doing team-mandated activities. It's not just show up and play.

[Mr. Brooks]

Since you have a choice, it is not exploitation.

Again, that's not what that word means. You are either thinking of a different word, or are just refusing to accept the factual definition of the word.

 

No sense in continuing this discussion if we can't agree to accept the factual definitions of the words we use, so I'm out.

[mlhouse]

 

There is no 42nd round. Hasn't been for a decade. However, you apparently believe all the players do is show up and play ball. That's not at all NEAR what is done. Trey Harris of the Braves organization quoted me 81 hours per week, though he did say that he spent roughly 12-15 hours of that on his own accord doing video review and cage/defense work on his own because he's a video junkie and relentless in improving. However, that still means that he was spending 66 hours per week doing team-mandated activities. It's not just show up and play.

 

And the player factored in whatever hours they spend on the job in their decision.  Show up and play.  85 hours per week.  It is immaterial.  

 

The player had an opportunity to play baseball at a professional level.  42nd or 84th round pick, it is immaterial.  They looked at the pros and cons of playing.  They reviewed their alternaitve.  Some chose to sign their baseball contracts.  Others decided to go onto the rest of their lives.  Pure subjective decisions as individuals.

 

"Baseball" on the other hand has a more objective viewpoint.  If they are not paying enough money and providing enough opportunity they would not get enough talent to play in their minor league systems. In this case, talent is both quality and quantity.  I think they are really looking at the quality parameter with this move, trying to keep talented athletes playing baseball rather than other sports.  

[mlhouse]

 

Again, that's not what that word means. You are either thinking of a different word, or are just refusing to accept the factual definition of the word.

No sense in continuing this discussion if we can't agree to accept the factual definitions of the words we use, so I'm out.

 

In an economic sense it means nothing else.  To exploit someone economically you can only do this if they have no choice.   Baseball players have choices.  They are not exploited.  

[biggentleben]

 

In an economic sense it means nothing else.  To exploit someone economically you can only do this if they have no choice.   Baseball players have choices.  They are not exploited.  

You believe they are not.

 

Your job can find many people who would willingly do it at some skill level. Just to have food on the table, some will do the job for $5 per hour, but they would not be able to afford basic living expenses and would fall below the poverty level, requiring them to utilize things like food stamps and Section 8 housing allowances.

 

Another group would do the job for $10 per hour, which barely scrapes by to cover basic living expenses. This group is not eligible for food stamps or housing allowances, which means they don't access government programs, but they don't ever get ahead in life as far as making their economic situation better.

 

The economic value that the job provides is $38/hour. At that level of pay, companies still make an excellent profit, those who produce the labor are paid according to their true value to the company, and employees and employers are both able to advance more securely.

 

Which model do you believe is best to pay?

 

Currently, minor leaguers aren't even in the first group until reaching full-season ball, which is roughly half of the minor league players. That is the point being made here. If that isn't clear and exploitative behavior in your mind, I do not know what would rise to that level for you...

[mlhouse]

 

You believe they are not.

 

Your job can find many people who would willingly do it at some skill level. Just to have food on the table, some will do the job for $5 per hour, but they would not be able to afford basic living expenses and would fall below the poverty level, requiring them to utilize things like food stamps and Section 8 housing allowances.

 

Another group would do the job for $10 per hour, which barely scrapes by to cover basic living expenses. This group is not eligible for food stamps or housing allowances, which means they don't access government programs, but they don't ever get ahead in life as far as making their economic situation better.

 

The economic value that the job provides is $38/hour. At that level of pay, companies still make an excellent profit, those who produce the labor are paid according to their true value to the company, and employees and employers are both able to advance more securely.

 

Which model do you believe is best to pay?

 

Currently, minor leaguers aren't even in the first group until reaching full-season ball, which is roughly half of the minor league players. That is the point being made here. If that isn't clear and exploitative behavior in your mind, I do not know what would rise to that level for you...

 

 

Again, you cannot exploit someone who has choices.   Why you continue to claim this is beyond reasonable.   The minor league baseball player can go do something else if they are being "exploited".  So can the person being paid $5/hour.

 

But, based on the alternatives available to that person, if that is their best subjective choice, by definition they are maximizing their opportunity.

 

When you exchange your time to an employer, you are better off.  You value the compensation you get more than the time you exchange.  The guy who is exchanging his labor for $5/hour so he can put food on the table is getting virtually infinite utility from their labor.

 

  Likewise, your employer also benefits.  They value the labor more than the compensation they give up to get the labor.

 

In a free exchange, it always is a win-win, not "explotataion".  If you don't like what you are doing, dosomething else.  

 

The best model for an employer is to pay the market wage for labor.  If they pay too little, they will not have enough labor production.  If they pay too much, they will be non-competitive in the marketplace and go out of business.

 

Only slaves receive a "living wage".  It is not the employer's job to worry about such things.  If it was, then the employer should also be able to dictate to the employee what they do in their personal lives.  Do you think the non-slave owner should be able to dictate to the employee when and how many children they may have?  How about where they live?   When they marry and to whom they marry?   These are all matters of "living", and if the employer is responsible for the employee "living" then they must demand control of their lives.  

 

Or, maybe we should just dispense with such idiotic notions as "living wage".

[biggentleben]

 

Again, you cannot exploit someone who has choices.   Why you continue to claim this is beyond reasonable.   The minor league baseball player can go do something else if they are being "exploited".  So can the person being paid $5/hour.

 

But, based on the alternatives available to that person, if that is their best subjective choice, by definition they are maximizing their opportunity.

 

When you exchange your time to an employer, you are better off.  You value the compensation you get more than the time you exchange.  The guy who is exchanging his labor for $5/hour so he can put food on the table is getting virtually infinite utility from their labor.

 

  Likewise, your employer also benefits.  They value the labor more than the compensation they give up to get the labor.

 

In a free exchange, it always is a win-win, not "explotataion".  If you don't like what you are doing, dosomething else.  

 

The best model for an employer is to pay the market wage for labor.  If they pay too little, they will not have enough labor production.  If they pay too much, they will be non-competitive in the marketplace and go out of business.

 

Only slaves receive a "living wage".  It is not the employer's job to worry about such things.  If it was, then the employer should also be able to dictate to the employee what they do in their personal lives.  Do you think the non-slave owner should be able to dictate to the employee when and how many children they may have?  How about where they live?   When they marry and to whom they marry?   These are all matters of "living", and if the employer is responsible for the employee "living" then they must demand control of their lives.  

 

Or, maybe we should just dispense with such idiotic notions as "living wage".

Wow. Posts like this are why we no longer have political discussions allowed on this forum. Significantly agree to disagree here as I actually like people.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Mod note: I haven’t checked in on this thread, but it’s gone too far away from the OP. Time to lock it.