The negotiations between the Professional Soccer Referees (PSRA) and the Professional Referees Organization (PRO) have taken a bitter turn recently, with PRO filing an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) charge against the PSRA. This charge stems from an alleged threat made by PSRA executive board member Chris Penso towards potential replacement workers, warning them that performing officiating work during a lockout could negatively impact their eligibility for assignments to officiate college soccer matches.
This dispute comes in the midst of a lockout instituted by PRO against PSRA referees after the union rejected a tentative collective bargaining agreement. This is not the first time PRO has resorted to a lockout during CBA negotiations, having done so once before in the last decade. The key demands from PSRA include increases in compensation and improved travel accommodations.
Replacement Referees and Resuming CBA Talks
With the MLS regular season already underway, replacement officiating crews have been called in for matches. These replacements come from various backgrounds, including professional, college, and youth ranks. CBA talks are scheduled to resume next week in New York City, where a federal mediator will be present to facilitate discussions.
Allegations of Coercion and Misconduct
The ULP charge filed by PRO alleges that Penso and other PSRA members have acted inappropriately by threatening replacement workers with negative consequences for engaging in work during the lockout. These threats include loss of outside employment, reputation damage, and exclusion from the officiating community. The document also accuses PSRA of revoking college assignments of replacement officials, which are considered outside employment unrelated to PRO operations.
In response to PRO’s filing, PSRA president Peter Manikowski stated that the union is reviewing the document and emphasized that the National Labor Relations Board is investigating the ULP charges previously filed by PSRA against PRO. Both sides have been trading accusations about the bargaining process, with each countering the other’s claims.
The rejection of the tentative agreement by PSRA members has led to tensions between the two parties. MLS commissioner Don Garber expressed disappointment over the rejection, highlighting the rarity of a bargaining unit reaching an agreement that its members do not support. On the other hand, PSRA defended its decision, stating that they were forced to put the proposal to a vote to illustrate the inadequacies of the offer. They also criticized PRO’s regressive bargaining tactics, accusing them of violating their obligation to bargain in good faith.
As the negotiations between PSRA and PRO continue to escalate, both parties are entrenched in their positions, with accusations and counter-accusations being exchanged. The presence of a federal mediator at the upcoming CBA talks indicates a concerted effort to find a resolution to the impasse. The outcome of these negotiations will not only impact the working conditions of soccer referees but also shed light on the complexities of labor relations in professional sports.
Leave a Reply