The WNBA and the Women’s National Basketball Association remain at odds with the current collective bargaining agreement that expires at the end of this month.
WNBPA Executive Director Terri Carmichael Jackson initially issued a fiery response following NBA Commissioner Adam Silver’s recent comments regarding revenue sharing — a key issue for players — when he said, in part, that “sharing is not the right way to look at it.”
Silver said WNBA players should “get a big raise in this round of collective bargaining, and they deserve it.”
But Jackson said players remain steadfast on their desire to see their increased salaries tied to a more robust revenue-sharing model that ties their pay to the league’s business growth.
“When the players opted out a year ago, they made it very clear that they wanted a pay system that values their work and allows them to grow with the business they run,” Jackson said in a statement provided to the Post and other media outlets. “The league’s response has been to run out of time, put lipstick on a pig and retread a system that is not tied to any part of the business and that intentionally undervalues players. The fact that the league now wants to label any part of its proposal as ‘uncapped’ is precisely why its leadership, transparency and accountability are currently being questioned.
“You know they know it’s bad when the best they say they can do is still the same thing: a fixed salary system and a separate revenue sharing plan that only includes a piece of the pie and pays itself (the league) back first,” Jackson continued. “We came to the table ready to do business,” Jackson said. “They responded with bad calculations and hope everyone doesn’t understand what ‘uncapped’ actually means.
A WNBA spokesperson, however, categorically refuted Jackson’s statement, calling it “incorrect and surprising” to suggest the league did not offer an “uncapped” option.
“The overall proposals we have made to players include a revenue sharing element which would see player compensation increase as league revenue increases – with no cap on the increase,” the spokesperson said. “It is frustrating and counterproductive for the union to make false statements about our proposals while accusing the league of delays. This is simply not true.”
The league said the WNBPA “has yet to offer a viable economic proposal and has repeatedly refused to meaningfully engage on many of our proposal terms.”
The WNBA’s latest proposal does not include a super maximum salary of $1 million or more in the first year, according to Front Office Sports.
Instead, the super-maximum salary proposal is closer to $850,000, and the minimum for veterans is about $300,000 for the first year, the report said.
In both cases, these are increases compared to the current collective agreement. The current league super-max is $249,244 and the veteran minimum is $78,831. But players could argue that increase doesn’t match the league’s burgeoning valuation, with some franchises valued north of $400 million.
Players are hoping for a salary model similar to the NBA, where basketball-related revenue (such as TV contracts, sponsorships and ticket sales) helps determine next year’s cap.
The current collective bargaining agreement expires on October 31. Although the two sides meet regularly, it seems likely that an extension will be necessary, similar to what happened the last time a new collective bargaining agreement was negotiated in 2019.
Nothing can happen during the WNBA offseason, including the draft lottery, expansion drafts, free agency and the college draft, until a new deal is ratified.
Both teams hope to avoid delaying the start of next season.
“We are prepared to continue negotiations in good faith and hope that they will do the same so that we can finalize a new, mutually beneficial collective bargaining agreement as quickly as possible,” the league spokesperson said.
The NBA, which owns 42 percent of the WNBA, did not respond to The Post’s request for comment.
