With less than one week until the league-imposed March 10 deadline for a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA), the WNBA and WNBPA seem far from reaching a deal.<\/p>\n
Instead of news about the two sides hashing out the final details of an agreement, reports of intra-union frustration have made headlines. Rattling tensions within the WNBPA have recently gotten louder, crescendoing with the public revelation of a letter sent by WNBPA executive committee members Kelsey Plum and Breanna Stewart to executive director Terri Carmichael Jackson.<\/p>\n
The WNBPA executive committee, depending on your interpretation, successfully refuted suspicions of discord or merely provided the patina of harmony with a the publication of a statement signed by all seven members.<\/p>\n
In an interview conducted by Front Office Sports\u2019 Annie Costabile, Jackson further pushbacked on notions of fracturing or factionalization within the union<\/a>. Instead, Jackson pitted players\u2019 frustrations on the league, telling Costabile<\/a>:<\/p>\n I think you\u2019re hearing that there is a discomfort with what\u2019s been playing out. I don\u2019t know that there\u2019s a discomfort with what we\u2019re doing.<\/p>\n I hear the frustration. I hear the emotions and the range of them as a result of the league putting pressure on the players, the league dragging this out. The one thing I said to [the players] is they have one tool and their tool is to out wait you.<\/p>\n How real is the disconnect between WNBPA leadership and players?<\/p>\n The IX Sports\u2019 Howard Megdal, however, interpreted the executive committee\u2019s letter as an attempt to mask substantive differences within the executive committee, as well as within the player population at large.<\/p>\n The leaked letter, three sources told The IX Sports, did not come from Plum\u2019s camp, Stewart\u2019s camp or Napheesa Collier\u2019s camp. That means, almost by definition, it came from a faction within the PA less eager to settle.<\/p>\n Megdal also reiterated earlier reporting that suggested that Collier\u2019s epic end-of-season press conference was not only aimed at WNBA leadership, but also WNBPA leadership.<\/p>\n Megdal further indicated that the players whose agents that signed the letter recently sent to Jackson<\/a> were very much aware of, and thus in support of, the letter and its contents. Megdal wrote<\/a>, \u201cAnyone who thinks that happened without buy-in from the players represented by those agents doesn\u2019t understand how being an agent works.\u201d<\/p>\n He referenced more instances of inadequate communication between the WNBPA and players, sharing<\/a>:<\/p>\n There are too many examples of this disconnect to list here, but the letter from Plum and Stewart detailed many of them, including how many members of the WNBPA were caught by surprise over even good news, like the OneTeam Partners licensing money that had collected over the past six years. The number of times even player reps have complained privately that they don\u2019t know about the basic functions of the WNBPA reinforce what is now spilling into public view.<\/p>\n Medgal cited further examples of player dissatisfaction, suggesting the union\u2019s goals have not been clearly articulated. He wrote<\/a>:<\/p>\n The PA, according to numerous members who spoke with The IX Sports, has been unwilling to commit to a figure internally they\u2019re fighting for on things like the veteran minimum, saying instead the final topline needed to be negotiated first. That\u2019s left numerous players unsure of what they\u2019re even fighting for.<\/p>\n On social media, Lexie Brown, the primary player representative for the Seattle Storm, offered an alternative perspective, expressing that she feels she has been appropriately informed of necessary information and asserting her confidence in Jackson.<\/p>\n Similarly, WNBPA secretary Elizabeth Williams told FOS\u2019 Costabile she was unaware that some players felt ill-informed about the union\u2019s approach to CBA negotiations. Williams relayed to Costabile<\/a>:<\/p>\n I think maybe because the pace of negotiations move faster now people may feel like they\u2019re playing catchup. That\u2019s my guess, but any member can initiate a call or meeting if they want to.<\/p>\n Williams, who was also part of the negotiations for the 2020 CBA, further suggested to Costabile that player representatives have been more actively involved in this round of negotiations.<\/p>\n Was the WNBPA player survey too convoluted?<\/p>\n Medgal\u2019s reporting also raised questions about the survey the WNBPA sent to players last week. He explained<\/a>:<\/p>\n Two things on this: it is notable that the PA effectively used push-polling methodology in surveying its membership. This isn\u2019t just a question in search of an answer; it leads to a skewing of the actual usefulness of the data for the PA itself.<\/p>\n Megdal additionally reported<\/a>, \u201cSix people who saw it told The IX Sports it left them more confused than before,\u201d and that:<\/p>\n Another [player] confirmed to me that the survey, even within push polling questions, neglected to provide a positive set of parameters for what players would want. This was particularly concerning as it related to the middle class of members.<\/p>\n FOS\u2019 Costabile, who obtained a copy of the survey, presented an extend example of the survey structure. From Costabile<\/a>:<\/p>\n The first question of the five-question survey obtained by FOS asked: \u201cWould you accept the league\u2019s proposal of \u201850% of net revenue,\u2019 which is less than 15% of gross revenue in an eight year deal or ask the union to keep negotiating?\u201d<\/p>\n The survey went on to ask players if they voted yes to accepting the 15% proposal, \u201care there additional wins you believe must come with the 15%?\u201d If their answer to that question was also yes, they were asked to select what their top five additional wins would be. If players answered \u201cno, keep negotiating,\u201d to that question, they were then prompted to answer what percentage of gross revenue they would be willing to accept: 18%, 20%, 22.5%, 25%, or \u201cother.\u201d Those players were then prompted to answer if there were additional wins that must come with that received revenue-share percentage. If yes, they were prompted to identify them.<\/p>\n Of the survey, Sophie Cunningham, the alternate player rep for the Indiana Fever, told Costabile<\/a>:<\/p>\n I think the questions were just fine. They were trying to allow people to fully understand what this means. If you say yes, this is what it means. If you say no, this is what it means. So, I personally was O.K. with how the questions were asked.<\/p>\n Are WNBA players united in their opinions about a potential strike?<\/p>\n Based on his reporting<\/a>, Megdal ultimately concluded that the actions of WNBPA leadership\u2014from the lack of transparency cited by agents and then Plum and Stewart in the now-public letters to Jackson to the somewhat convoluted survey to the absence of CBA benchmarks\u2014appear to be those of individuals who want one outcome: a strike.<\/p>\n That\u2019s what someone Megdal described <\/a>\u201cas a source familiar with the internal process\u201d told him.<\/p>\n Jackson refuted that notion in her conversation with Costabile, insisting<\/a>:<\/p>\n Nobody wants a strike. I think that is absolutely what you\u2019re hearing. Do I hear division in that? I don\u2019t. I hear players saying they are frustrated. They are disappointed that a negotiation that started early with the intention of having significant progress at All-Star, with the intention of wrapping up in October<\/p>\n WNBPA treasurer Brianna Turner told Costabile,<\/a> \u201cNo one wants a strike. You don\u2019t call a strike because you want to, you\u2019re calling a strike because you have to.\u201d<\/p>\n That\u2019s also been the stance asserted by her fellow executive committee members, vice presidents Alysha Clark and Stewart.<\/p>\n On Wednesday, Clark went on ESPN\u2019s NBA Today and indicated that, \u201cWe are at a place where we feel the like the proposals the league has sent haven\u2019t been good ones,\u201d and, thus, a strike remains possible. Clark explained<\/a>:<\/p>\n As a union, we\u2019re going to use every tool that we have in our pocket to be able to fight and get what we know we deserve. So it\u2019s very much still on the table, and that is something that I think is clear as we continue to have these conversations with our union and the players in the league.<\/p>\n On Thursday, Stewart made an NBA Today appearance and echoed Clark, saying:<\/p>\n A strike is definitely on the table. We\u2019re negotiating for the best deal possible. We have the strike authorization vote ready. Do we wanna do it? No, we don\u2019t, but if we have to we will.<\/p>\n So, what\u2019s next for the WNBPA and the players?<\/p>\n In their letter to Jackson, Plum and Stewart sought more information about the league\u2019s expenses and revenue, as least as union leadership understands them, and an analysis of the potential losses players could experience in a shortened or delayed season compared to the possible gains players could accrue through continued negotiations for a more favorable CBA.<\/p>\n Per Costabile<\/a>, both players, as well as others, can access such information:<\/p>\n Full access was granted to players who made that request following a process that included signing league-required nondisclosure agreements. The entire executive committee now has access to the league\u2019s complete proposals, according to union staff. Players could get full access\u2014beyond summaries that have been provided\u2014to the WNBA\u2019s financial records available to the union following a similar process required for access to proposals, according to union staff.<\/p>\n