What unionization could mean for minor-league baseball players

The Major League Baseball Players Association announced Monday it is launching an effort to unionize minor-league players in affiliated baseball, a group that has lacked anything resembling representation since the early 20th century. Minor leaguers were sent authorization cards Sunday night, the first step in allowing them to vote on MLBPA representation.

Minor-league players have dealt with poverty-level wages for decades. Although MLB commissioner Rob Manfred told reporters earlier this year that he "rejected the premise that (owners) are not paying a living wage," in 2018, MLB successfully lobbied Congress to treat minor leaguers as seasonal workers, making them exempt from federal minimum-wage laws. This year, MLB agreed to pay $185 million to 23,000 former and current minor-league players to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging wage violations.

While minor-league salaries increased modestly last year, they remain paltry: players in rookie ball are guaranteed $400 per week, players in Single-A $500, Double-A $600, and Triple-A $700. Pay does not start becoming significant until a player is added to a 40-man roster, which allows players to be represented by the MLBPA.

While incremental progress has been made, the MLBPA's announcement Monday could be a much larger victory for minor leaguers.

Rarely in the game's history have minor leaguers had a seat at the table of affiliated baseball negotiations. If they ultimately achieve this, much-needed wage and benefits improvements will certainly follow.

Not only could that help players' financial condition, especially those without large signing bonuses (most of the more than 5,000 players in the minors), but it could also improve the product on the major-league field. If minor leaguers are treated and paid as full-time, year-round employees, it stands to reason they'll have better access to training and nutrition year-round instead of spending the offseason at second jobs.

However, there is a catch: If minor leaguers are able to unionize, it could accelerate a reduction in minor-league head count.

MLB reduced its collection of affiliated minor-league teams by 42 in 2020 and reportedly sought further reductions this year. If future unionization - or the prospect of it - increases player salaries, MLB ownership groups could potentially be motivated to cut even more affiliates.

But another motivating factor in reducing the number of teams is separate from pay: Some organizations believe they do not need as many players in their minor leagues to develop quality major-league talent.

While the Houston Astros of the late 2010s will be forever remembered for their sign-stealing scandal, they were also at the vanguard of player development.

During that time, they reduced their minor-league affiliate count from nine teams to seven. The Astros believed that by embracing new player- and ball-tracking technology and new training concepts, they had a better understanding of minor-league players' underlying skills and how to help those players reach their potential. They chose to have fewer players and concentrate their resources on supporting their most promising prospects.

Recently, the Chicago White Sox elected to send most of their best prospects to Double-A, what they are dubbing "Project Birmingham." It's a similar concept, with the club concentrating its top talent in one place, presumably along with its best minor-league coaches and tools.

Whether such practices work out long term is not a certainty. There's risk in reducing affiliated minor-league teams because it reduces the opportunities to find and develop diamonds in the rough. It also means fewer opportunities for the sport to market itself in smaller towns and cities across North America (not to mention what losing teams means for those local economies). And this is at a time when MLB is losing attendance at the major-league gate and its average fan is the oldest among major North American sports leagues.

While independent minor-league baseball is another vehicle for players and fans, it lacks as much appeal without a direct tie to the game's top level.

Perhaps the future is a minor-league landscape that features better-paid players, but fewer of them.

MLB seems interested in reducing the count of minor-league teams regardless of the question of pay. So if the future is a more consolidated minor-league structure, that may very well happen with or without a living wage for players - unless they are able to bargain for it. It's in the interest of current and future minor leaguers to be part of the MLBPA, which can negotiate on their behalf.

For more than 100 years, minor leaguers haven't had a voice at the table. It's about time they did.

Travis Sawchik is theScore's senior baseball writer.