For this reason, MLB and the Players Association are careful to plan out the hearing schedule so that the other side has no potential advantage. Often this means that very similar players have their hearings scheduled for the same day. Typically the hearing takes place in a hotel conference room. The technical procedure is simple. The player and club supply the arbitrator with a Uniform Player Contract in duplicate that has been properly completed except for the salary figure.
Each side gets one hour to present its case. By tradition, the order of presentations is Player-Club-Player-Club-Player-Club, which gives the club the last word in each phase. Some agents feel that even if this motion is unsuccessful it may stand as a helpful symbol to the arbitrators that the club has a unfair advantage in the hearing. Within 24 hours of the end of the hearing the panel chief informs the Players Association and the Labor Relations Department of MLB of the final decision, providing additional time for a settlement.
The panel does not submit an opinion explaining their decision; it does not explain why they chose one salary figure over the other. The panel chair is also directed not to inform either party of the actual vote of panel members , , who voted for whom? That information is communicated to the Players Association and the Labor Relations Department on March 15th following the hearings and is used by the two sides to help them craft arbitrator slates for the next year.
Baseball arbitration is considered a pretty good gig for professional arbitrators. At the beginning, salary arbitration cases were traditionally argued by an agent representing the player and by front-office personnel representing the club perhaps the GM, Assistant GM, or someone further down the organization chart. Old-time baseball men were no match for law school-trained agents in a semi-judicial setting. Soon enough the teams caught on and began employing their own specialists and hiring their own lawyers.
Currently the cases are almost always argued by professional labor lawyers guys like Mark Rosenthal and Eric Joss and neither side presently has a talent advantage.
Cases are prepared rigorously by personnel on both sides. Agents are known to hire full-time arbitration staff, and also to bring on short-term consultants and advisors during the off-season. Teams often do the same, bringing on interns or advisors and often designating senior Baseball Operations personnel to organize case preparation throughout the off-season.
If evidence is brought up that is not specifically listed in the CBA it is not to be considered by the arbitrators. For years, the Players Association executed a brilliant strategy. As free agency created market competition and poor payroll management, GMs would bid each other up and ink players to ridiculous contracts. In arbitration hearings, player-agents would make clear and convincing comparisons between their young stud and the mediocre talent with a ridiculously bloated contract.
The result was devastating for management. Each bad contract sent ripples through the market and forced salaries up for everyone, all the way down to two-year veterans in their first salary arbitration hearing. The rising tide of salaries in the open market would lift all boats. In the labor agreement, the owners were able to address that in part.
In other words, Super Twos can be compared to Super Twos and three-year players, but not four-year players. Threes can be compared to other threes and fours, but not fives. The exception is that fives can compare themselves to anyone, just like free agents. The Players Association did secure a loophole, though. Each panel is directed to give as much weight to the argument as they choose to. Yes, there is, and this is one of the more confusing rules in baseball contracts.
This is critically different from the rule regarding maximum salary reduction for players who have not yet reached salary arbitration eligibility. Players who have less than three but more than two years of service time can also become arbitration eligible if they meet certain criteria; these are known as "Super Two" players. Players and clubs negotiate over salaries, primarily based on comparable players who have signed contracts in recent seasons.
A player's salary can indeed be reduced in arbitration -- with 20 percent being the maximum amount by which a salary can be cut. If the club and player have not agreed on a salary by a deadline in mid-January, the club and player must exchange salary figures for the upcoming season. After the figures are exchanged, a hearing is scheduled in February.
If no one-year or multi-year settlement can be reached by the hearing date, the case is brought before a panel of arbitrators. Oftentimes, a player and the team will agree on a salary number before officially going to arbitration, and in recent years franchises have tended to sign players to extensions, often "buying out" years of arbitration and sometimes free-agency years.
Typically, players get raises during the arbitration process, but their salaries cannot be cut more than 20 percent in relation to the prior year. MLB salary arbitration is reserved for players who have at least three years of MLB service time but are not yet eligible for free agency, which is earned after six years of MLB service time.
In certain cases, players who reach a certain service-time threshold are eligible for arbitration a year earlier — this is known as a Super Two player. A Super Two player is a player who has more than two but fewer than three years of MLB service time — that's time spent on a man roster or the MLB Injured List — but ranks in the top 22 percent of service time is pooled with players who are arbitration eligible, thus accelerating the player's arbitration clock, giving him an extra year of arbitration.
In , the Super Two cutoff was placed at two years, days of service time, the earliest cutoff in years. Players on their rookie contracts have no leverage when it comes to salary, meaning the club sets the player's salary as it sees fit usually around league minimum. Arbitration-eligible players are more fairly paid for their contributions to their major league squad, and for the first time have a say in their salary. Arbitration can be a messy, vicious process; teams are trying to prove the player is worth less than what he believes he's worth, while the player is trying to earn a raise in the years leading up to free agency.
0コメント