They won't let Shane Spencer into the players union. The poor guy. It's a cute picture at least...

http://www.nypost.com/sports/yankees/21135.htm

I think the union is wrong here. A player makes one "mistake" and it appears he's banned from the union for life. It appears he's made restitution when, frankly, none was necessary. I have to wonder how many ballplayers would have done the "correct" thing if they were in the exact situation as Spencer. I'm guessing my answer is there are a lot of hypocrite union baseball players.

On the contrary, many minor-league players who faced that choice did NOT do the same thing, but turned down a chance to play in the meaningless "replacement" games. Something the slant of the anti-union NY Post doesn't consider...

I do agree that the union should reconsider such cases after several years (I believe Rick Reed was in a similar situation in his Met days).

More evidence that baseball players in general are complete pricks. "Just business, nothing personal?" My ass. But good lord, Shane Spencer is adorable.

[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
On the contrary, many minor-league players who faced that choice did NOT do the same thing, but turned down a chance to play in the meaningless "replacement" games. Something the slant of the anti-union NY Post doesn't consider.

---

You make it sound like the Major League Baseball Players Association is a real union, fighting the fight against evil robber baron capitalists. News flash: they're evil robber baron capitalists, too. They're just a heck of a lot more fun to watch than the members of the owners' union.

Look for ...
The union label ...

[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
On the contrary, many minor-league players who faced that choice did NOT do the same thing, but turned down a chance to play in the meaningless "replacement" games. Something the slant of the anti-union NY Post doesn't consider...

---

I remember reading a similar story not long ago that WASN'T from the NY Post, if that helps.

A similar thing happened to Dave Pallone and a couple other umpires after their strike. If I recall, none of those replacements were allowed in the union for some time, at least. I don't know if any of them are still active umpiring, or if they were ever allowed in the prior union, or if they are active, if they're in the current union. Perhaps Ump25 can clarify....

[quote]Originally posted by Joe in Philly:
A similar thing happened to Dave Pallone and a couple other umpires after their strike. If I recall, none of those replacements were allowed in the union for some time, at least. I don't know if any of them are still active umpiring, or if they were ever allowed in the prior union, or if they are active, if they're in the current union. Perhaps Ump25 can clarify....

---

Derryl Cousins (currently on Joe Brinkman's crew) and John Shulock (a crew chief & currently on the disabled list) are the remaining two umpires left from the 1979 umpires strike.

Neither was ever allowed entry into the Major League Umpires Association, but both are members of the World Umpires Association, our current union.

These gentlemen and others who crossed the lines and took jobs when offered them were never accepted by the veterans of that day. Interestingly, some of those old union hawks (Froemming, Montague, Crawford, et. al.) now do not associate with many of us current umpires because of the 1999 mass resignation fiasco and subsequent demise of the MLUA.

Sadly, many friendships among lifelong friends have been completely and bitterly destroyed. Steve Rippley, Bruce Froemming, Jerry Crawford, Drew Coble, Joe Brinkman, their wives, myself--we all used to be the closest of friends and family members. Now, Steve, Bruce, Jerry, and Drew (and their wives, save for Drew's who passed away from cancer in the middle of this mess) won't even give us the time of day.

Lifelong friends have become bitter enemies, even though Joe and I and others have reached out to them. Nothing is worth the destruction of a friendship. Nothing.

[ August 24, 2002: Message edited by: Ump25 ]

Here's a few more cute pics of Shane. None in the Yankee gray, though.

http://j2p46m35.0catch.com/spencer/Spencer.html

Sorry to change the subject, but this situation reminds me of the movie Billy Elliot. In it, Billy's father, who is an on-strike union coal miner, finds that he has to cross the picket line and be a scab worker. Why? Because he needs money to send his son to ballet school in London. He can't understand his son's interest in ballet, doesn't want his son interested in ballet, but he swallows his pride because it's Billy's only chance at having a better life.

In Shane Spencer's case, he must have felt that this was his only chance to get exposure in the big leagues, his only chance to realize his dream of being a major league player. He was blackmailed by the Yankee brass. And for that he's blacklisted by his fellow players?

Sometimes I really wonder if the players have a heart. Because the people who are really going to suffer during the strike are the people making minimum wage at the concession stands, selling programs, and so on at the ballpark. They're out of a job. And who's going to help them?

First, there very likely isn't going to BE a strike.

Second, why, when the players are reportedly making concessions on revenue sharing and the luxury tax, are they still getting all the blame and the violin-string "heartless" label from so many of you? *sigh* If only most Americans hadn't played baseball (badly) as youths, this "getting millions to play a game" garbage wouldn't be so ubiquitous.

The fact that their top salaries are so much higher than coal miners, CITT, doesn't make MLBPA (or SAG!) any less of a union.

[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
The fact that their top salaries are so much higher than coal miners, CITT, doesn't make MLBPA (or SAG!) any less of a union.

---

But it IS less of a union. If it were a real union, there would be a union payscale, instead of individually negotiated contracts. The best pipefitter in town isn't free to negotiate a higher-paying contract in a union shop situation.

And do they vote like a union would (secret ballot, majority rules, etc.)? It has been stated in several articles that I have seen, that the majority of players probably wouldn't strike. But then again, that's speculation I guess.

[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: MSUBulldog ]

[quote]Originally posted by MSUBulldog:
It has been stated in several articles that I have seen, that the majority of players probably wouldn't strike...

---

I can't think of a statement that I believe to be further from reality (aside from "That President Bush sure is giving hell to corporate criminals!"). Sounds like the words of columnists who are anti-player shills. Unfortunately, there are still a few owners who believe that, who apparently have been comatose for 30 years. The solidarity of that union is strong.

An interesting article can be found here about the 1995 replacement players. My favorite line:

[quote] The Yankee replacement team was so bad, it took batting practice for three days at Coors Field in Denver and didn't hit a ball over the fence.

---

I didn't know Cory Lidle and Chris Truby, or most of those on that list, were among the replacements. I *did* remember that Sparky Anderson refused to participate in the whole charade.

Well, that certainly explains why those players do not appear in the High Heat Major League Baseball 2003 computer game I purchased.

And yes, thank goodness there is no strike!!!!

Pursuant to Bobcat's comment, it would appear from the ESPN article that the only real downside to having been a scab was no licensing dough. They still are represented in arbitration and get the pension. What an awful time that was for baseball--luckily, there won't be a repeat of that.

[quote]Originally posted by Jim Allen:
Pursuant to Bobcat's comment,

---

Uhm, thats Bulldog. But I forgive you. We'll probably lose to the Ducks today, particularly without our quarterback. But thats another topic...

Thank goodness for labor peace for 4 years. Although I have to say I disagree with today's bottom, which I'll start in another thread.

[quote]Uhm, thats Bulldog

---

Sorry 'bout that! Memo to Self: Proofread your posts before hitting submit.

I know its confusing... sometimes I have to read to make sure I was the one that really posted it.

My only experience with unions was in San Francisco, where I was a manager for a company that ran a warehouse where the employees were paid $11.50/hr, back in '88. The company moved the warehouse to West Sacramento, hired a whole new staff at $7.20/hr, and the union just sat on their hands. I never had a job that required union membership, and if they're all as effective as that, I don't think I'd be wanting to pay dues to the union, only to have the union turn around and sell me out. Pete