PDA

View Full Version : How does arbitration work?


downstairs
10-03-2006, 09:45 AM
I read in another thread (can't find it now... the Crede one?) that during arbitration the arbiter can only take the player's offer or the team's offer. He/she cannot find a middle ground.

Is this true? Doesn't that sort of fly in the face of the definition of "arbitration"?

Ol' No. 2
10-03-2006, 10:47 AM
I read in another thread (can't find it now... the Crede one?) that during arbitration the arbiter can only take the player's offer or the team's offer. He/she cannot find a middle ground.

Is this true? Doesn't that sort of fly in the face of the definition of "arbitration"?That's correct. It sounds goofy on its face, but in reality it works pretty well because it forces both sides to come in with reasonable offers - otherwise they're going to lose. Without that limitation, there's no reason for a team not to low-ball and for a player not to ask for the moon. What you see if you look at arbitration figures is that the spread between the team's offer and the player's offer is generally pretty small. And because that spread is generally small, in most cases they settle and don't go to arbitration at all.

southside rocks
10-03-2006, 10:59 AM
It is an unusual system of arbitration when you consider how arb is done in other fields. I'm an arbitrator in the futures trading industry, and when we decide a claim, we can come up with pretty much any figure we feel is appropriate, based on the evidence that's been presented to us by both sides at hearing. But it can take 10-12 months to get an arb claim heard in this field, and that wouldn't work at all in MLB salary negotiations.

The MLB way is actually, as ON2 noted, very efficient at doing what it was designed to do. And by increasing the opportunities and likelihood of settlements, it is a very effective form of ADR (alternative dispute resolution).

StillMissOzzie
10-03-2006, 05:18 PM
That's correct. It sounds goofy on its face, but in reality it works pretty well because it forces both sides to come in with reasonable offers - otherwise they're going to lose. Without that limitation, there's no reason for a team not to low-ball and for a player not to ask for the moon. What you see if you look at arbitration figures is that the spread between the team's offer and the player's offer is generally pretty small. And because that spread is generally small, in most cases they settle and don't go to arbitration at all.

Yeah, but players never "lose" in arbitration, their incomes stil are doubled or tripled.

SMO
:gulp:

Ol' No. 2
10-03-2006, 05:31 PM
Yeah, but players never "lose" in arbitration, their incomes stil are doubled or tripled.

SMO
:gulp:Only because they were almost always playing for well below their market value the year before.