Editing Reserve clause (section)

==Baseball==
{{MLB Labor Relations}}
In the late 19th century, [[baseball]] in America became popular enough that its major teams began to be businesses of considerable value, and the players were paid sums that were well above the wages earned by common workers.  To control player salary demands, team owners used a standardized contract for the players, in which the major variable was salary. The players unsuccessfully tried to fight the growing ''reserve system'' by forming a union, the Brotherhood, and founding their own [[Players' League]] in 1890, but the Player's League lasted just one season. For the next 80 years, the ''reserve system'' ruled the game. All player contracts were for one year. There were no modern-day long-term contracts, because the reserve clause negated the need for them.

The reserve clause inception was in 1879, when it was proposed as a way to formalize an unofficial rule known as the "five man rule". It would allow teams to reserve players for each season, unless a player opted out of his contract and did not play in the league for a year. While the previous informal rule was no secret, teams had started to sign other teams' "reserved players", thus encroaching the rule. The resulting controversies caused the [[National League (baseball)|National League]] to instate the rule officially on December 6, 1879.<ref>{{cite book |last= Morris|first= Peter|title= A Game of Inches: the Stories behind the Innovations That Shaped Baseball|url=https://archive.org/details/gameofinchesstor0000morr|url-access= registration|chapter= The Reserve Clause|year= 2010|publisher= Ivan R. Dee|location= Chicago|isbn= 978-1-56663705-3}}</ref>

Teams realized that if players were free to go from team to team then salaries would escalate dramatically. Therefore, they seldom granted players (at least valuable ones) a release, but retained their rights, or traded them to other teams for the rights to other players, or sold them outright for cash. Players thus had a choice only of signing for what their team offered them, or "holding out" (refusing to play, and therefore, not being paid).

Under the [[Sherman Antitrust Act]] of 1890, two or more non-affiliated companies in any other interstate business were prohibited from colluding with each other to fix prices or establish schedules or rates. Enforcement of the act reached its apotheosis in 1910 when the Supreme Court affirmed the government's order to dissolve the Standard Oil conglomerate. 

However, under the reasoning that keeping baseball (the only large-scale professional sport in America during the 1920s) prosperous required granting it immunity from the Sherman Act, the [[United States Supreme Court]] had held in 1922 in ''[[Federal Baseball Club v. National League]]'' (259 U.S. 200) that baseball was an "amusement", and that organizing a schedule of games between independently owned and operated clubs operating in various states, and engaging in activities incidental thereto, did not constitute "[[interstate commerce]]" and therefore [[antitrust]] laws did not apply to such activity.

In 1951, [[U.S. House of Representatives|Representative]] [[Emanuel Celler]] announced that he would hold hearings in the [[United States House Judiciary Committee]] to examine MLB's [[antitrust]] exemption.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/20332280/ |title=Mystery Man New Witness For Baseball|newspaper=Quad-City Times|agency=Associated Press|page=15 |via=Newspapers.com |date=May 24, 2018 |accessdate=March 1, 2022}}</ref> Celler entered the hearings believing that MLB needed laws to support the reserve clause.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/97359500/truman-favors-baseball-anti-trust/|title=Truman Favors Baseball Anti-Trust Investigation|agency=Associated Press|work=The Tampa Tribune|via=Newspapers.com |date=1951-07-19 |accessdate=2022-03-06}}</ref> Star players, such as [[Lou Boudreau]] and [[Pee Wee Reese]], indicated their support of the reserve clause. Minor league veteran [[Ross Horning]] testified about his experiences in baseball, which he said were more common for rank-and-file players.<ref name=sabr2/> [[Cy Block]] testified about his experiences and how the reserve clause prevented him from getting an extended trial in the major leagues.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/98111191/oconnor-ex-landis-aide-testifies-befo/ |title=O'Connor, Ex-Landis Aide, Testifies Before House Group|page=30|agency=Associated Press|work=The Herald-News|via=Newspapers.com |date=1951-10-16 |accessdate=2022-03-08}}</ref> Celler's final report suggested that the [[U.S. Congress]] should take no action, allowing for the matter to be settled in the [[federal judiciary of the United States]]. The [[Supreme Court of the United States]] upheld MLB's antitrust exemption and the reserve clause in ''[[Toolson v. New York Yankees, Inc.]]'' in 1953.<ref name=sabr2>{{Cite web|url=https://sabr.org/journal/article/voices-for-the-voiceless-ross-horning-cy-block-and-the-unwelcome-truth/|title=Voices for the Voiceless: Ross Horning, Cy Block, and the Unwelcome Truth |first=Warren |last=Corbett|publisher=Society for American Baseball Research|accessdate=March 8, 2022}}</ref>

This pass on "[[trust-busting]]" essentially codified the legal legitimacy of the reserve clause for many years, and gave what came to be known as Major League Baseball unprecedented power over both players and the independent organizations of the [[National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues]] (NAPBL). MLB could dictate not only how and where professional players could move between major league clubs, but as they took the opportunity of the [[Great Depression]] to establish systems of [[farm team]]s of players wholly owned by the parent clubs placed on independent teams from the NA leagues around the country, they developed a way of expanding control of contracts of virtually the entire pool of professional baseball players.

When other team sports, particularly [[ice hockey]], [[American football|football]], and [[basketball]] developed professional [[sports league|leagues]], their owners essentially emulated baseball's reserve clause.  This system stood largely unchallenged other than by the occasional holdout for many years.

[[File:Curt Flood 58-69.JPG|thumb|right|upright=.66|[[Curt Flood]]]]
In October 1969, [[St. Louis Cardinals]] outfielder [[Curt Flood]] unsuccessfully challenged his trade to the [[Philadelphia Phillies]] and sacrificed the remainder of his playing career to pursue this litigation.<ref>{{cite book |last=Flynn|first=Neal|title= Baseball's Reserve System: The Case and Trial of Curt Flood Vs. Major League Baseball|year= 2006|publisher= Walnut Park Group Inc.|isbn= 0-97765780-9}}</ref> In ''[[Flood v. Kuhn]]'' the Supreme Court established that the reserve clause was a legitimate basis for negotiation in [[collective bargaining]] between players and owners, and that the historic baseball antitrust exemption was valid for baseball only and not applicable to any other sport. Although the Court ruled in baseball's favor 5–3, it admitted the original grounds for the antitrust exemption were tenuous at best, that baseball was indeed [[interstate commerce]] for purposes of the act and the exemption was an "anomaly" it had explicitly refused to extend to other professional sports or entertainment.<ref>{{ussc|name=Flood v. Kuhn|volume=407|page=258|year=1972}}</ref>

Removing the reserve clause from player contracts became the primary goal of negotiations between the [[Major League Baseball Players Association]] and the owners. The reserve clause was struck down in [[1975 in baseball|1975]] when arbitrator Peter Seitz ruled that since pitchers [[Andy Messersmith]] and [[Dave McNally]] had played for one season without a contract, they could become free agents. This decision essentially dismantled the reserve clause and opened the door to widespread free agency within North American professional baseball.