Atlanta Braves: CBA limits club options for dealing with Marcell Ozuna
After the arrest of the Atlanta Braves high-profile, high-dollar dollar free agent, fans want the club to take action, but the team has few viable options.
We’ve all read about the arrest of Atlanta Braves outfielder Marcell Ozuna, and Alan wrote in general about the club’s options. However, fans continue to ask why the team doesn’t take action. The answer lies in the Joint Domestic Violence Policy collectively bargained in 2015, which was expanded and incorporated into the 2017-2021 Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).
The goal here isn’t to discuss what should or shouldn’t happen to the Atlanta Braves outfielder but to explain the team’s options under the CBA.
The only reference to domestic violence in the 2012-2016 CBA came in Attachment 27—Joint Treatment Program for Alcohol-Related and Off-Field Violent Conduct; a letter from MLB Executive VP Robert Manfred, to then MLBPA Executive Director Michael Weiner, confirming that the union and MLB had agreed to establish a “Joint Treatment Program to deal with certain alcohol-related conduct and off-field violent conduct.”
If a player was arrested for an alcohol-related event, appeared intoxicated on the job, medical staff suspected an alcohol problem, or the player was arrested, the incident was referred to the Treatment Board.
The Treatment Board evaluated the player to determine if he would “benefit from a treatment program and, if so, the type of treatment program that would be most effective
for the Player involved.” However, the player’s participation was voluntary; failure to attend could not result in disciplinary action.
If the Ozuna incident had happened in 2013, the league could have suspended him until the legal system took its course or placed him on the ineligible list if incarcerated; aside from that, the only option for the league was asking the player to attend a treatment program, which he could have refused to attend without penalty.
Unsurprisingly, that program wasn’t much of a determent. Once he became commissioner, Manfred and worked with MLBPA’s new executive director Tony Clark to expand the policy to include minor league players and add more teeth.
The Atlanta Braves still pay
The new CBA formalized the 2015 agreement as attachment 52. Once the commissioner is notified of the offense, he may place the player on administrative leave for up to seven days and request an extension of seven days from the Player’s Association for a total of 14 days; administrative leave is not considered a disciplinary action.
While on Administrative Leave, the player:
- Continues to receive salary
- Continues to accrue Major League service time
- Is added to the Major League Restricted List as it relates to the 40-man roster – the Atlanta Braves may fill the roster spot but would continue to pay Ozuna.
The Commissioner’s Office may also choose to defer Administrative Leave until the Player is charged or the Commissioner’s Office receives credible information corroborating the allegations.
Once the player’s Administrative Leave and any extension are complete, the Commissioner may:
- Reinstate the Player from the Restricted List,
- Impose immediate discipline on the Player,
- Request another extension of Administrative Leave from the MLBPA,
- Defer a disciplinary determination until a later date, or
- Impose a paid suspension pending resolution of legal proceedings
Impact of CBA restrictions
As far as I can determine, the Commissioner is deferring Administrative Leave for now. The official Atlanta Braves roster page continues to list Ozuna on the ten-day IL.
The wording of the CBA is specific; once the Administrative Leave period ends, the Commissioner must make a final decision. Starting the Administrative Leave clock forces MLB to decide before the legal situation takes its course.
Deferring Administrative Leave doesn’t affect the Atlanta Braves position; the club pays him on Administrative Leave or the IL. If they need the roster slot, they can move him to the 60-day IL.
Atlanta Braves rights
The CBA specifically gives the Commissioner’s Office the right to impose discipline. In a report on the Felipe Vazquez case in 2019, Sports Illustrated said the length of a suspension is up to the commissioner.
At a future date at Manfred’s choosing, Manfred could suspend Vazquez for violating the joint policy. The length of suspension would be entirely up to Manfred; there is no minimum or maximum amount.
The CBA does allow the commissioner to transfer disciplinary authority to the club at any time before the end of the Administrative leave period. In high-profile cases such as those of Ozuna or Felipe Vasquez, no Commissioner will transfer disciplinary authority to a club.
Absent a transfer of authority, the club can’t do anything that resembles a disciplinary or adverse action related to the incident. However, the club may put him on the restricted list until he’s released. While on the restricted list, players are not paid.
More from Tomahawk Take
- Atlanta Braves 2012 Prospect Review: Joey Terdoslavich
- Braves News: Braves sign Fuentes, Andruw’s HOF candidacy, more
- The Weakest Braves Homers Since 2015
- Atlanta Braves Sign Joshua Fuentes to Minor League Deal
- Braves News: New Year’s Eve comes with several questions about the 2023 Braves
If the player is injured while incarcerated because of the incident, and that injury rendered him unable to play when he’s released, the club may invoke paragraph 7 (b) of the uniform player’s contract (Appendix A of the current CBA). If the player shall:
- fail, refuse or neglect to conform his personal conduct to the standards of good citizenship and good sportsmanship or to keep himself in first-class physical condition or to obey the Club’s training rules; or
- fail, in the opinion of the Club’s management, to exhibit sufficient skill or competitive ability to qualify or continue as a member of the Club’s team; or
- fail, refuse or neglect to render his services hereunder or in any other manner materially breach this contract.
If the player is terminated under paragraph 7. (b), he may receive up to 45-days termination pay plus travel pay to his home, as described under Article IX B of the CBA.
The wording suggests that this paragraph would allow the club to unceremoniously dump a player like Ozuna, but it isn’t that simple.
About six years ago, I asked Jim Duquette why teams never used this option on players with long-term contracts who suddenly weren’t playing at a Major League level. I was told teams typically delete that clause from long-term contracts.
Even if the clause is still in the contract, enforcing it requires arbitration, and there’s history suggesting the player always wins.
A little history
Generally speaking, collectively bargained agreements are considered sacrosanct by federal courts. Collective bargaining agreements contain mandated arbitration procedures for situations when disputes arise and it’s binding arbitration.
Does the name LaMarr Hoyt ring a bell? Following a successful 1985 season, Hoyt was arrested twice in the first two months of 1986, went into rehab, had a forgettable season, was arrested again after the season, and spent 45 days in jail.
Commissioner Peter Ueberroth suspended him, and the team tried to void the contract.
after Hoyt’s second border arrest, Smith decided the pitcher was a cocaine user. The Padres unilaterally voided Hoyt’s three-year, $3 million deal, and released him. Baseball commissioner Peter Ueberroth piled on, suspending Hoyt for the entire 1987 [season].
The arbiter reduced the suspension to 60-days and ordered the Padres to reinstate him, reasoning that the team hadn’t done enough to help Hoyt, who — despite attending rehab — called Hoyt a ‘missuser’ [sic] and not an abuser of drugs.
As Ken Rosenthal noted in his post for The Athletic (subscription required), two cases where a club sought to terminate a contract or invoke a clause in the contract restricting off-field activity, both involving the Mets, were settled through arbitration. Neither resulted in an outright win for the team; the Mets reduced their liability slightly but still paid most of both contracts.
Can the Atlanta Braves sue?
I’ve heard and taken part in a lot of discussions regarding the Atlanta Braves potentially filing suit to have the contract voided. I find the option unlikely because, as I noted above, arbitration is binding on both sides. In any case, taking this to court probably distasteful to the team and MLB.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has statutory jurisdiction over private-sector employers who take part in interstate commerce. MLB’s anti-trust exemption is based on the principle that it doesn’t conduct interstate commerce. Does that mean the NLRB is out of the picture? Does MLB want to find out? Probably not.
When Ozuna’s cast comes off and medically cleared, it’s reasonable to assume that the Commissioner will put him on Administrative Leave and that the union will allow MLB to extend the leave as long as necessary; they’ve done it in serious cases in the past and want no part in publicly supporting a player charged with spousal abuse until the legal system’s run its course.
Likely outcomes
According to the Georgia Commission on Family Violence, the spouse cannot drop charges once the case is submitted to the prosecutor. It also limits what the prosecutor can do with the case.
The prosecutor will not offer or agree to reduce a family violence charge to a lesser offense unless . . .the ends of justice are served thereby. . . . Once an indictment has been returned, or an accusation has been filed, the prosecutor will not move to dismiss the charges merely because a victim is reluctant to cooperate. The case will proceed until the defendant either enters a plea or is tried by a judge or jury. (Emphasis is from the text of the document, not mine.)
The details of police intervention and statements are pretty graphic and easy to find. Alan linked them in his initial report. Lawyers may find loopholes, but the text of the law is pretty clear.
If the above holds true, Ozuna will certainly come to trial. If the bodycam footage and the officers’ statements on the scene hold true, jail time is likely, and according to Jeff Passan, it won’t be short.
Now that the Sandy Springs, Ga., police have confirmed that the alleged victim was Marcell Ozuna's wife, an update to the previous note on sentencing guidelines for aggravated assault strangulation: When done to a spouse, it's a felony with a minimum of three years and max of 20.
— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) May 30, 2021
These cases take a while to get to trial, and I have no idea how long someone must serve before parole is an option; without parole, his contract would be up before he’s released. As noted in the Vasquez case, deportation is a possibility, but I have no idea how likely it is.
As noted earlier, if he’s still under contract, the Commissioner could suspend him for as long as he wants. However, a year is the most likely length based on precedent, and an arbiter might well suggest that acts like double jeopardy and overturn or reduce any suspension.
That’s a wrap
if Ozuna is convicted and sentencing guidelines followed, it’s unlikely the Atlanta Braves will have to pay the remainder of his contract.
dark. Next. Podcasting the Ozuna story and more
If, for some reason, Ozuna is released without going to trial, the Commissioner may suspend him. However, once he serves his suspension and is cleared to return to baseball, the Atlanta Braves must either release him or bring him back to the team. In either scenario, they will pay his remaining salary.