logo
ENع
The board decision that sent the MLB, NFL unions into controversy

The board decision that sent the MLB, NFL unions into controversy

Yahoo3 hours ago

Last June, eight members of the board of directors for a licensing group called OneTeam Partners, which is co-owned by the players unions for five major sports leagues, signed a resolution that would have included the member unions in a plan to receive 'profits units.' Those units, like traditional equity, could be turned into cash if the company did well.
It was a move that raised alarms within at least one of the unions.
Advertisement
By late 2024, an official at the National Football League Players Association had repeatedly raised concerns that implementing the plan could mean that labor officials serving on OneTeam's board of directors — including the head of the NFL players union, Lloyd Howell Jr., and the leader of the Major League Baseball players union, Tony Clark — were attempting to make a change that could lead to their own financial gain, potentially at the expense of union members.
The resolution, which was obtained by The Athletic, called for any eventual payouts — made through what is known as a senior employee incentive plan (SEIP) — to go to the unions the board members hail from. The resolution also directly acknowledged the possibility that the unions could then grant that money to their board members.
'The explicit goal throughout the process was to financially enrich the individuals who serve on the OTP Board as labor organization representatives,' the NFLPA official wrote to lawyers in a communication criticizing the plan, which was reviewed by The Athletic. '… the idea was to pay the money into the unions, then the individuals.'
In a statement to The Athletic, OneTeam said that though the plan was considered, it was ultimately abandoned.
Advertisement
'In early 2024, OneTeam initiated an exploratory review to determine whether the company could lawfully offer incentive-based compensation to current and prospective Board members,' OneTeam Partners said. 'This exploratory effort was part of a broader initiative to assess strategies for attracting high-caliber, independent talent.
'Following the legal advice of a labor law expert, it was determined that the best practice, if implemented, was to make grants to the respective players associations. In so doing, any future payments would be governed by each union's player-approved bylaws, policy, and governance frameworks.
It added: 'To be unequivocally clear: no OneTeam board member, nor any union employee, was directly or indirectly granted equity in OneTeam, holds equity in OneTeam or is a participant in its SEIP and any claim to the contrary is simply misinformed and false.'
Federal authorities are conducting an investigation related to OneTeam Partners and union officials. The full scope of the probe, which is being run out of the Eastern District of New York, is unclear. The Eastern District of New York declined to comment.
Advertisement
Five major sports unions hold stakes in OneTeam, the two largest belonging to the NFLPA and the Major League Baseball Players Association, which together own two-thirds of the company, according to people briefed on the business structure who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The NFLPA has 44 percent, the MLBPA 22 percent.
The unions representing players in Major League Soccer, the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team and the Women's National Basketball Association own much smaller shares in OneTeam: 3.3 percent for MLS, .3 percent for the USWNTPA, and .2 percent for the WNBA, according to one of the people briefed on the structure.
Early this month, the FBI started calling MLB and NFL players or their representatives. Prosecutor David Berman is heading the federal investigation, said people briefed on its process who were not authorized to speak publicly.
With a federal investigation underway, the NFLPA has retained outside counsel separate from the outside lawyers retained by its executive director, Howell. Howell's lawyer did not reply to requests for comment. 'We're guided by our responsibility to our members in everything we do and we will continue to fully cooperate with the investigation,' the NFLPA said in a statement to The Athletic.
Advertisement
The MLBPA declined to comment Friday. That union too has retained outside counsel separate from its leader, Clark. His attorney did not return requests for comment.
The NFLPA official who voiced concern about the incentive plan wrote that they were concerned about the potential for various conflicts of interest. The official argued internally that the change to the plan could dilute the players' existing stakes, which they held via their unions. The official also questioned whether the players were informed of how their financial interests might be affected.
The NFLPA official's email with lawyers shows talk of changing OneTeam's SEIP dated to 2023, when a new CEO took over. In March 2024, OneTeam asked outside counsel whether there would be any issues granting union officials on its board participation in a SEIP, according to the same email. In response, the official wrote, the law firm flagged concerns regarding the National Labor Relations Act were any units to be granted directly to union board members.
Plans like SEIP are common in the business world. Companies use them to reward and lure top leaders, and the programs often grant traditional shares in a company. Private companies in particular will often grant something that operates similarly to shares but is not traditional equity, according to Chris Crawford, managing director for the executive compensation practice at the firm Gallagher.
Advertisement
'It's not a publicly traded, readily tradable environment,' Crawford said. 'It gets into these third-party transactions that get a little bit messy. The most common is by a generic term called 'phantom stock.''
Hence OneTeam's use of 'profits units.'
But ultimately, OneTeam is not a common business because it is largely owned by unions. Union officials have legal obligations to their members and their members' interests, and most unions don't have for-profit arms with the overlay of those governance concerns.
'The labor organizations' representatives on the OTP Board are there as FIDUCIARIES representing their union members' direct ownership interests in the Company — their legal duties are not to the Company generally, but rather their union members' ownership in the company,' the NFLPA official wrote in the email to lawyers.
Advertisement
The union officials have their positions on OneTeam's board because of their union roles, positions for which they are already compensated. Howell was paid $3.6 million by the NFLPA for the 12 months from March 2024 through February 2025, according to the union's annual disclosure filed with the Department of Labor. Clark was paid $3.5 million for the 2024 calendar year, per the baseball union's filing.
The NFLPA has four seats on OneTeam's board, and the MLBPA has three seats. Both Howell's and Clark's signatures appear on the resolution to change OneTeam's senior employee incentive plan.
The unions representing players in MLS, the USWNT and the WNBA share one seat on the board that rotates. Only the signature of Becca Roux, the head of the USWNTPA, appears on the resolution from last year.
Roux, as well as Bob Foose, head of the MLSPA, and Terri Jackson, head of the WNBPA, have hired Steve McCool of McGuireWoods as outside counsel.
Advertisement
'I notified the prosecutor in New York that I represent a number of OTP board members,' McCool said by phone Friday. 'My clients have no cause for concern and they are available to answer any questions the government may have about this matter.'
Outside investors own the remaining 30 percent of OneTeam that is not owned by unions.
The SEIP resolution called for the NFLPA to receive 44 percent of the new plan units available to the board, and the MLBPA 33 percent. The other three unions were in line to receive 3.7 percent each. The outside investors on the board were not going to receive any new incentive units, the resolution said.
Such an arrangement has the potential to create at least the appearance of a conflict of interest, according to Lee Adler, a labor lawyer with no involvement in the matter who has long worked as counsel to unions.
Advertisement
'Is there something in that set of criteria for the incentive that might have some influence on how or what the union officials who sit on the board actually end up … legislating (at OneTeam)?' asked Adler, a lecturer at the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations. NFLPA employees said at a meeting in November 2024 that they expected payments via SEIP would be $200,000 to $300,000, the NFLPA official wrote in the email.
Sports unions have moved aggressively to capitalize on their players' branding rights. The MLBPA and NFLPA were among the founders of OneTeam in 2019. Both unions already had for-profit arms that handled licensing business, and those arms still exist today. But they were betting that a company with aggregated rights would have greater leverage.
The venture has been a boon not only for the unions but also for the private equity investors who partnered with them. RedBird Capital cashed out its 40 percent stake in 2022, when the company had a $1.9 billion valuation.
The windfalls from name, image and licensing rights carry a slew of gains for athletes, including bolstering traditional labor objectives like collective bargaining. The NFLPA reported about $101 million in revenue from OneTeam from early 2024 into 2025, and the MLBPA about $45 million for 2024. But both the baseball and football unions have been wrapped up in public controversy this year over, in part, OneTeam.
Advertisement
Late last year, an anonymous complaint filed with the National Labor Relations Board levied allegations at Clark, including concerns over equity from OneTeam. The football union, where internal complaints had already been lodged, then brought on an outside firm, Linklaters, to conduct a review.
The NFLPA has not publicized that firm's findings. But in March, in an email reviewed by , Howell notified OneTeam's board of directors that Linklaters found the NFLPA and OneTeam had been in compliance.
This article originally appeared in The Athletic.
NFL, MLB, MLS, WNBA, Sports Business
2025 The Athletic Media Company

Hashtags

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What Do Employees Really Want Instead Of Pizza Parties?
What Do Employees Really Want Instead Of Pizza Parties?

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

What Do Employees Really Want Instead Of Pizza Parties?

'Overworked and underpaid employees don't want pizza parties and team-building exercises,' he said. His eyes looked strained, and I couldn't tell if he had a headache or was exhausted… I guessed both. 'What's wrong with pizza?' I joked, trying to lighten the mood. 'Nothing. I like pizza. But when you're stressed about finances, have to fight for every penny you make, juggle more responsibilities than you have time, and doing everything you can to exceed expectations to the point of burnout… well, what you need is to feel valued, have opportunities for growth, a wage and a title that reflects everything that you're doing, some help, strong support and a good work culture… some freakin' hope… something that has more of a lasting impact than a slice of pizza.' I remained silent. I couldn't decide if I was allowing him more space to think or if I was thinking to myself how much I agreed with him. 'It's almost insulting,' he continued. '99.9% of the time, they act like they don't even recognize our existence, and now they want to throw us a party? No thanks. Having a party is great, but first, let's get your team healthy enough to enjoy it.' He paused. 'They're panhandling a superficial solution to a real problem.' 'And what's the real problem?' I asked. 'They aren't investing in people — they're investing in results. They don't realize that the results will exceed their expectations if you authentically invest in good, hardworking, talented people. Despite the lack of meaningful appreciation and resources, we have a great team. Think what it could be if they added the missing components.' He removed his glasses and wiped his eyes. He stared at me with a tiredness that went well beyond the moment. 'Wouldn't it be nice to have an environment where employees are invested in so much that they could find another job but don't because they love where they work?' he asked. 'That would be nice,' I said. 'What do you think is going to happen?' 'We are woefully under-supported, yet the expectations keep rising. Essentially, we're being set up to fail… either by failing to reach their unattainable bar or by failing our health and family in thinking that we must continue without setting realistic boundaries. Heck, it could end where I cannot meet their increasing expectations, get let go, and cannot even use them as a reference. That would be ridiculous, as I'm a great employee. I feel destined to fail, and that's a horrible feeling.' 'Sounds like fear is playing a role, too,' I said. 'You bet it does! They have me: I am too strapped for time and finances to even look for another job. By the end of the workday, I'm beyond exhausted, have headaches, can't sleep, and am barely present for my family. Yet, I'm doing this for my family. That's messed up. Worst, I actually like my job. Heck, I'm great at it. But who cares? They'd rather put money into hiring other positions and socials than caring for the few doing the bulk of the work. Where does that leave me? Seriously, where? It leaves me angry because I CARE.' I didn't say anything. 'Right… you're lack of response has been my answer for a long time. I can't do a damn thing, and they know it. But you know what?' 'What?' 'Even more than what I know about them, I know me,' he said. 'I've been in much worse situations than this one. I'm accustomed to survival mode. The difference was that I was fighting for something worth the sacrifice. Here, I am fighting to take care of my family in an environment that isn't fighting for me. The sacrifice, as it stands, is not supporting my why… if I am too sick or strained to be available to my family, why am I giving my limited energy to a job that would soon forget me the moment I'm gone?' 'Very true,' I said. 'I have two months of savings in my account. If I quit today, I would have two months to look for a job. Imagine what I could do with two months of actual rest and serenity. Granted, it would be stressful, especially since I'm already familiar with the devil I know. But, as it stands now, eventually, my body will force me to take two months off to recuperate from whatever condition I'm bringing upon myself. So, if I have to be down and out, wouldn't it be better to be down and out to find a job — rested and fed — than sick?' 'Sounds like you lack work-life balance because you fear losing your job if you speak up, fear failing their continued rising expectations, and fear of an eventual health prognosis of keeping your job if nothing changes,' I said. 'I'm afraid either way, I'm going to lose everything,' he said. 'Let's play that out. What if you lost your job today for whatever reason? What horrible thing could happen?' I asked. 'I could have a hard time finding another job due to the economy, I could be forced to sell our home, I would default on some loans, I would….' He stopped. 'I would fail my family.' 'Of all you just said, you didn't mention losing your family,' I said. 'Oh, I would never lose them. They are my life, and I know my wife and kids are always beside me,' he said. 'Always.' 'So, you'll never lose what is most important because you won't lose them, right?' I asked. 'Right,' he said. For the first time, his eyes looked like they had just read a hopeful line in a sad book. 'You're not letting your family down by acknowledging your worth, recognizing where you're most needed, and adjusting accordingly,' I said. 'What are you suggesting?' he asked. 'I would never tell you what to do, as that is between you and your family. I would recommend you take it to prayer with your wife. I would caution you not to allow this to continue for much longer, as you will eventually begin to harbor resentment and anger toward your employer and yourself for putting up with it. And I would stop having so many passive boundaries.' 'Passive boundaries?' he asked. 'Yes. You know you are a valuable employee. You mentioned to me earlier that you've been a stellar employee in every job you've had. Guess what? You will be again if you choose to get another job. Stop allowing others to pacify you with empty promises and pizza parties. Speak to what you want, whether a promotion or help … whatever you know to be true. If they don't see your requests as valid, that doesn't make them false. It just means they don't know your worth… make sure you do.' 'I know my worth, but I also know my responsibilities,' he said. 'That's fair. Often, we do things as adults because we 'have to' more than 'want to.' Responsibility isn't meant to be taken lightly or shirked. Over time, however, we must pay attention to patterns, noticing when individuals consistently demonstrate that they are not going to change and when it is upon us to change.' 'I get that. I'm just terrified of letting my family down,' he said. The weight upon him was suffocating, and I could tell he was carrying a burden that would eventually break him. 'That's speaking from a position of self-loathing and shame. Such thinking keeps you stagnant in areas where God has gifted you and given you talents to grow. There is nothing shameful about taking care of your health, not diminishing your value, and moving forward in full faith that God is opening doors you haven't even seen.' 'Opening doors I haven't even seen,' he repeated. 'I like the sound of that.' 'All I'm saying is keep your options open… you've convinced yourself that you're trapped. You're not. Even if things change for the better in your current job or it all falls away, the most important things will remain. And God will eventually position you on higher ground. He knows your needs. He knows you. Believe this. Trust God. And move forward, being okay with whatever outcome God provides.' 'Whatever outcome God provides. Yes,' he said. For the first time, he offered a faint smile. God, be with us as we make difficult decisions. Help us to simply be obedient to You, trusting that You will either change our situation or change us. May we use the skills and talents You have blessed us with to serve You with joy, knowing that You will provide for us and sustain us well beyond any earthly position. You are stronger than our greatest fears, and in Your strength, and in Your name, we move. Our true position is in You alone, Christ Jesus. Lead us, guide us, and take us from fear to faith in Your presence and peace. This column was initially published by CherryRoad Media. ©Tiffany Kaye Chartier.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store