Silverman v. Major League Baseball Player Relations Committee, Inc.
67 F. 3d 1054, 1995 WL 574780 (1995)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
In professional sports, established terms of employment like free agency, anti-collusion provisions, and salary arbitration are mandatory subjects of bargaining under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). An employer may not unilaterally alter these terms upon the expiration of a collective bargaining agreement without first bargaining to a genuine impasse with the employees' union.
Facts:
- The Major League Baseball Player Relations Committee, Inc. (PRC) represented the 28 clubs, and the Major League Baseball Players Association represented the players.
- The parties' most recent collective bargaining agreement, the Basic Agreement, became effective in 1990 and contained provisions for free agency for players with over six years of service, salary arbitration for certain players with less service, and an anti-collusion clause.
- The Basic Agreement expired on December 31, 1993, after the PRC gave notice of termination.
- During unsuccessful negotiations for a new agreement, the PRC proposed adding a salary cap and eliminating salary arbitration.
- On August 12, 1994, the players went on strike, which ultimately terminated the 1994 baseball season.
- On February 6, 1995, the PRC informed the clubs that they no longer had the authority to negotiate with individual players, effectively and unilaterally eliminating the existing free agency and salary arbitration systems.
Procedural Posture:
- The Players Association filed an unfair labor practice charge against the PRC and the Clubs with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
- The NLRB's General Counsel issued a complaint, alleging the clubs' unilateral actions violated the NLRA.
- The NLRB authorized its General Counsel to seek a temporary injunction in federal district court pursuant to NLRA Section 10(j).
- The NLRB Regional Director filed a petition for a temporary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
- The district court granted the temporary injunction, ordering the clubs to restore the prior terms and bargain in good faith.
- The PRC and the Clubs, as appellants, appealed the district court's grant of the injunction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Are the free agency, anti-collusion, and salary arbitration provisions of an expired collective bargaining agreement in professional baseball mandatory subjects of bargaining under the NLRA that cannot be unilaterally eliminated by the employer absent an impasse?
Opinions:
Majority - Winter, Circuit Judge
Yes. The free agency, anti-collusion, and salary arbitration provisions are mandatory subjects of bargaining that survive the expiration of the collective agreement and cannot be unilaterally changed by the employer without first bargaining to an impasse. These provisions are central to wage determination and conditions of employment in professional sports. The court reasoned that free agency and the reserve system are integral to setting player salaries and represent the core of collective bargaining in the industry; one cannot be a mandatory subject without the other also being one. These provisions directly relate to the division of revenues between clubs and players, making them a quintessential 'term and condition of employment.' The court rejected the clubs' argument that salary arbitration was a permissive form of 'interest arbitration,' instead finding it was a collectively-bargained mechanism for setting individual salaries for a specific group of players under defined criteria, which is a mandatory subject. Therefore, the NLRB had reasonable cause to believe the clubs' unilateral actions constituted an unfair labor practice.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies that key economic structures in professional sports labor agreements, such as free agency and salary arbitration, are protected as mandatory subjects of bargaining under federal labor law. It prevents management from using the expiration of a collective bargaining agreement to unilaterally dismantle established systems of player compensation and mobility. The ruling confirms the NLRB's authority to seek injunctive relief to maintain the status quo during contentious sports labor disputes, thereby preserving the integrity of the bargaining process. By acknowledging the unique economic realities of professional sports, the case adapts traditional labor law principles to this specialized industry, setting a precedent that impacts negotiations across all major sports leagues.
Unlock the full brief for Silverman v. Major League Baseball Player Relations Committee, Inc.