I was reading last week about the collapse (again) of my Mets. It is an annual saga interrupted by moments of unimaginable joy (1969, 1986, 2015). And despite the inevitable October demise, I still find myself checking the box score every morning and chatting with my fellow Mets fans every evening about strategy, players, and the future.
            But as the fall playoffs approach, absent the team from Queens, there is a possibility that waiting for next year might take longer than usual.
            The “Basic Agreement” between Major League’s baseball owners and its Players Association is set to expire on December 1. Until a new agreement is reached between the owners and the union, there will not be any Major League baseball.
            The sticking point in these labor negotiations is over how much time a player must put in on a  major league roster before becoming eligible for free agency. There has been a major shift in player salaries over the last decade as teams have turned to computer analytics to better determine player value. Whereas during the first forty years of free agency a player’s value was determined based on past performance, these days a player’s value is determined based on projected future performance.
            Computer statistical analysis gives baseball’s owners and executives a crystal ball that allows them to project future value. And a majority of players are discovering that by the time they hit free agency six years into their careers, their best years are behind them.
            The labor negotiations are going to be structured on how soon players will be able to hit the free market, thus allowing competing teams to bid for their services. Under the current system, a player remains the property of his current team for his first six years of major league service, meaning that no matter how good he is, no other team can bid for his services.
            Because there is no competition for his services, his value is substantially lowered and he must wait for a big payday. This type of artificial cap on salary does not happen in most other industries.
            When I got out of law school, I was able to take a job wherever I wanted and go to the best bidder. And if I was not happy after six months, I could move to a different bidder. That is how the world of labor services work.
            It is basic economics. Employees hit the market, take their skills to the best bidder, and continue to work there until a better offer comes along. The idea that an employee is stuck working for the same employer for the first six years of his career is nonsensical in just about every industry, but is the standard in professional sports.
            And because so many of baseball’s biggest stars also happen to be its youngest players with the least amount of service time, baseball’s owners are getting a huge artificial discount on labor costs and they are able to exploit that artificially low cost to their benefit.
            The players union caught on to the change in the game wrought by analytics too late and has been left with a union of players that are not being adequately compensated compared to their value.
            And that is why, when the Basic Agreement ends in December, it may take some time before we see major leaguers back on the field in the spring. ​

​            If you follow the national news, either by watching the networks, the cable channels, or social media, you might get the idea that America is still a right-leaning nation when it comes to policy-making. Our Supreme Court is definitely a conservative bench even though it still takes the opportunity from time to time to break that mold.
            Our Senate is essentially controlled by two moderate Democrats from West Virginia and Arizona, two conservative-leaning states. And our House of Representatives is split just about down the middle.
            So the progressive agendas that have been advanced by the left side of the Democratic party haven’t gotten much traction in the Congress.
            But the same is not true in the Nutmeg state. Here, our politics are pretty clearly blue, and our elected representatives are overwhelmingly progressive in their views. With a governor who leans to the left and an Assembly that embraces progressive ideas, Connecticut has become a place where progressive ideas get tested out before going national.
            This coming October, employers and employees are going to see the law of the workplace change in ways that favor of employee in pursuit of the state’s progressive agenda.
            For a lot of you out there, the word “progressive” is a dirty word. But in the most recent case, the new laws make the workplace a little fairer for workers. And for those conservatives out there who work to earn a wage every day, you might like some of these new provisions, even though they might carry a “progressive” label.
            We all know that it is illegal to discriminate against workers based on their age. And as workers begin to reach their late 40s and early 50s, the real possibility that a pink slip might be coming for no other reason than age can be really disconcerting. And yet job decisions continue to be made on the basis of age.
            Employers have different ways of discovering age. They don’t have to ask you when you were born to figure out how old you are. They can usually tell by asking when you graduated high school. Subtract 18 from that year and they have your birth year and know how old you are.
            But under the new law, employers can no longer ask when you graduated. They cannot ask your age, they cannot ask you date of birth, and they cannot ask when you attended or graduated from school.
            The limitation applies to an “initial employment application.”
            Any employer who has three or more employees must comply with the law starting on October 1.
            That means that employers who use a general application are going to have to modify it to take out questions that allow the employer to infer a candidate’s age. And employees that may be concerned that they fall into a potential category for discrimination, should modify their resumes to take out any references that allow age to be inferred.
            The idea behind the law is a good one. Even employers who may not have an intention to discriminate may still make a hiring decision based on age - everything else being equal. If there is no way to determine age from an application, then the playing field will be leveled to allow for the selection of the best candidate, which should be favorable for all involved.           

    Last month Governor Lamont signed legislation requiring employers to provide employees with wage ranges for positions in their companies. The idea is that with more transparency, wage gaps will be tightened and folks will be paid based on value rather than on gender. It's a good idea and, based on studies, seems like it should work. 
    Employers need to know that the law is going into effect on October 1st, and there are severe penalties for those who don't comply. This week I have written about employer obligations. Fall is fast approaching; if I can assist you or your clients in navigating this treacherous employment environment, please be in touch. I am grateful for the chance to help. 
The labor market is red-hot right now. We have an overheated economy presenting itself in many places including the labor market.
            Lots of jobs are chasing a few employees, and the result is that employees have lots of leverage in negotiating terms of employment. It is important for employees to assert the leverage they have because right now is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to redefine the parameters of work and make them employee friendly before the market settles.
            One thing we have learned during the pandemic is that folks like to work their own schedules whenever possible. The idea of working Monday through Friday from 9-to-5 is so 1990s. These days, the promise of the internet and access to wide-ranging communications have made it possible to do lots of jobs from just about anywhere at just about any time.
            And, from what we have seen, employees have embraced this new freedom in large numbers.
            A few weeks ago I wrote about the four-day workweek. If you need a refresher, I said that a four-day workweek does not work if we simply cram five days of work into four days.
            A four-day work week works when employees are allowed to do their work at their own pace in order to produce a superior product. At least one study has shown that less work and more leisure makes for better workplace outcomes.
            Hours matter, but I guess jobs usually come down to money.
            In June, Governor Lamont signed into law “An Act Concerning the Disclsoure of Salary Ranges.” The new law, which goes into effect on October 1st, is part of the state’s continuing quest to close the pay gap caused by gender bias.
            The law will require certain employers to provide job applicants with a “wage range” for the position for which the applicant is applying. The range must be provided when the applicant requests it, or when an offer of compensation is made to the applicant (whichever comes first).
            The law by itself adds greater leverage to an employee seeking work and will allow an employee to use that range to negotiate more favorable terms in other areas such as hours and days of work, time off, and schedule security.
            The law does not just apply to applicants, though. It also applies to current employees. It requires employers to provide its employees with a wage range for the employee’s position when the employee is hired, when the employee’s position is changed, or when the employee requests the information.
            Employers need to be prepared to provide this information, and they should be working on it now. That is because an employer who fails to comply with the law will be subject to legal action for damages including payment of the employee’s attorney’s fees and costs, and for punitive damages.
            A “wage range” is defined under the statute as “the range of wages an employer anticipates relying on when setting wages for a position.” A wage range could be defined by a budget for the position, actual wages paid for the position, or a pay scale that is in effect.
            Now is the time for employees to start demanding to know their worth because they have leverage to do so. Employers need to be aware of their new obligations and adjust if they are going to fill important positions in their companies. ​