“They refuse to meet with us, so we’re not giving [our proposal] to them. That’s no way to negotiate. We’ll sit on this until January 7 if we have to.”UNION COUNSEL JEFFREY KESSLER
There is a proposal out there that maybe, just maybe, could end the NBA lockout and provide salvation for a season because the union has agreed to limit how much the superstars can earn. Sounds encouraging, huh? Here’s the catch.
The Players Association will only present the offer at a negotiating meeting and the league has said there will be no meeting. So the union “indefinitely” postponed presenting the offer.
Las Vegas is taking bets to see which side turns blue first in the breath-holding exchange. The league is daring the union that it can go longer. The union is double-daring. And everybody is sticking out their tongues.
“They refuse to meet with us, so we’re not giving it to them,” said Jeffrey Kessler, outside counsel for the union, regarding the new offer. “That’s no way to negotiate. We’ll sit on this until January 7 if we have to.”
Or else everybody is going home forever and ever, you big meanies.
On Wednesday, Players Association executive director Billy Hunter revealed the union was putting together a “final” proposal for the owners to consider in hopes of ending the six-month lockout that has blistered the league. That offer, it was learned, called for a salary ceiling of under $15 million – roughly within $2 million of the league’s proposed $12.25 million limit for players with 10 years or more.
The union also agreed to move very close, within $500,000, of both the league’s $8.75 million ceiling for players in years zero to six and the $10.5 million for players in years seven through nine. Now the key is getting the owners to see it.
According to Jeffrey Mishkin, the league’s chief legal officer, Hunter yesterday called NBA commissioner David Stern and spoke about the proposal. Hunter suggested that Kessler forward the proposal to Mishkin. The two lawyers spoke. Mishkin said Kessler indicated the union was still working on the offer and asked for a meeting. All previous union offers were presented at such sessions.
“I said, ‘Jeff, we’ve already given you our final proposal. You guys rejected it. But we’re not going to be discourteous. If there’s something you want us to take to give to the labor relations committee we will, but I need a proposal,'” Mishkin recounted. “He said he’d get back to me. He did get back and said in light of our declining to meet they are indefinitely postponing giving us a final offer.”
Indefinite postponements are tricky at this stage. The season is set to be nuked Jan. 7. Mishkin said Kessler did not discuss specifics of the deal.
“He told me it would be comprehensive and that it would cover more than the high-end players but he did not provide specifics,” Mishkin said.
“If they want to find out what’s in it, they’re going to have to meet. This is not a game. It’s time to bargain in good faith and the posturing has to stop,” Kessler stressed.
Stern has set Jan. 7, Thursday, as the date when the labor relations committee will recommend to the Board of Governors that the season be canceled if no new deal is reached or if there are no signs a deal can be reached. The league has maintained there will be no new meetings.
“A lot of this is coming down to respect issues, it really is,” said agent Keith Glass. “You’ve got a guy on one side saying, ‘This is my final offer’ and then he mails it to membership and says, ‘Take it or we cancel.’ It’s like asking your father for permission at this point. If it’s not important enough for you to meet, then [the union] must feel like, ‘What the hell. Why send it in and have it dismissed?’ So I can understand that.”
The union feels it has given all it can and made the ultimate concession by agreeing to become the first major American sports league with a limit on individual salaries. Hunter wants a full-blown meeting with players present, but the league points to want it calls its final offer, a proposal that the union rejected.
“I said [to Kessler] … that if you have a final proposal we will take it and forward it to the labor relations committee but there’s no point in a meeting if we’ve made to you our final proposal and you’ve rejected it,'” Mishkin said. “He said, ‘OK, if you’re not going to meet with us we’re not going to give the final proposal.’
“At this late date we shouldn’t be playing games. We’re trying to be as straight as we can. We’ve given as much as the labor relations committee has authorized us to give. We’ve given it all and they said no. That leaves us with very little hope. But we’re not going to be discourteous. If they have something else they want us to consider, we will put it in front of the labor relations committee to consider.”