-
Jeff Carlisle, US soccer reporter
Negotiations between the Professional Soccer Referees (PSRA) – the union that represents officials working at Major League Soccer matches – and their employer, the Professional Referees Organization (PRO), have become increasingly acrimonious, with the PRO filing a complaint of unfair labor practice ( ULP). Charge against the PSRA earlier this week.
The filing, a copy of which was obtained by ESPN, alleges that PSRA Executive Board member Chris Benso “unlawfully threatened and coerced potential workers by threatening that performing official work during the shutdown would adversely affect the eligibility of officials to assume business conduct duties.” College football games.”
– Stream on ESPN+: LaLiga, Bundesliga, more (US)
The charge comes amid a PRO shutdown of PSRA governors that was created after the union voted overwhelmingly to reject a temporary collective bargaining agreement negotiated between representatives of the two organizations. This is the second time in the past 10 years that a PRO team, which is partly funded by MLS, has blocked PSRA referees during CBA negotiations. The PSRA seeks to increase compensation as well as improve travel accommodations.
The Major League Soccer regular season began on Wednesday with Inter Miami’s replacement refereeing staff and Lionel MessiVictory over Real Salt Lake. A full slate of matches has been set for this weekend with substitute referees coming from the professional, college and youth ranks.
The Comprehensive Peace Agreement talks are scheduled to resume next Wednesday in New York City in the presence of a federal mediator.
The ULP document goes on to allege that Penso, the other bargaining unit, and members of the PSRA voided the college’s appointments of replacement administrators.
“College football’s administrative functions are outside functions unrelated to PRO operations, and Mr. Penso, as well as several other bargaining units and PSRA members, are responsible for outsourcing such work to third parties,” the document states.
The document also alleges that on or about February 18, 2024 and thereafter, other agents of the PSRA, including the bargaining unit and PSRA members, “threatened replacement workers with retaliation for engaging in alternative work during the shutdown, including, e.g. Without limitation, loss of outside employment (e.g., college administration duties and other non-compromised unit work); loss of reputation and future opportunities to officiate professionally assigned matches; exclusion from the social and professional management community; and other explicit and implicit threats to participation in unit work Negotiating the PSRA during a work stoppage is protected under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).”
The PSRA had previously brought two ULP charges against PRO. The first, filed on January 5, alleges that PRO representatives spoke directly with union members about CBA talks without union leadership present, a tactic known as “direct dealing.”
The second ULP charge, filed earlier this month, alleges that PRO general manager Mark Geiger sent a letter to union members on February 9 explaining that if the tentative agreement was not approved, players would be disqualified, and their current subscription withdrawn. Proposing and agreeing only on substantially lower quality terms.
The PSRA complaint asserts that this constitutes “regressive bargaining and abuse.” [PRO’s] The obligation to negotiate in good faith constitutes retaliation against PSRA members for engaging in protected activity.”
Contacted by ESPN after the PRO filing was revealed, PSRA president Peter Manikowski said: “The union is backing down [the document]“We want to reiterate that the National Labor Relations Board is investigating the two unfair labor practices charges we filed in January and February.”
PRO’s ULP filing comes amid mutual accusations between the two sides over the bargaining process. Before Wednesday’s season-opener between Miami and Real Salt Lake, MLS Commissioner Don Garber told reporters that rejecting the tentative agreement was a “very disappointing process.”
“I can’t recall in nearly 40 years of being in the sport that there’s been a bargaining unit that came to an agreement and then not been able to get the membership to support it,” he said.
The PSRA responded on Thursday, saying, among other things, that its negotiators repeatedly told their PRO counterparts that what was offered would not be approved by its members, and they only put the tentative agreement to a vote because they were told “there is no more money,” and that Need to clarify how inadequate the proposal is. She also called the proposed no-strike/no-lockout agreement insufficient given that it would have frozen wages at 2023 levels.
This prompted a reaction from Geiger that the PSRA had mischaracterized its message to union members, and that it was simply relaying what would happen if the deal was rejected. Geiger added that the offer to pay PSRA members the same wage during negotiations was required under U.S. labor law, and would be implemented as negotiations continued.
