Caitlin Clark and her teammates have rejected the WNBA‘s latest offer for a new Collective Bargaining Agreement, citing concerns over revenue sharing and player rights as the dispute underscores growing mistrust.
The WNBA and the Women’s National Basketball Players Association (WNBPA) are working under a second deadline extension, set for January 9, yet progress has been slow as key differences persist.
Revenue sharing has emerged as the most contentious issue. The league’s proposal sets a 10 to 14 percent share of projected revenue, according to a source familiar with the discussions.
However, players argue the figure is too conservative to reflect the league’s rapid expansion as they think compensation should scale with women’s basketball’s growth as it hits a golden era.
The union is pushing for a dynamic model, where player shares increase in line with revenue growth. For example, an 18 percent revenue boost in 2027 should result in an 18 percent increase in player earnings.
“It’s a joke, honestly,” said Alysha Clark, vice president of the WNBPA executive committee, as per The Washington Post. “For it not to grow, it would decrease over the span of this new CBA.
“We want to grow as the business grows. That’s the whole point. We want a meaningful revenue share model because we want to compensate players for what we do to help grow this business.”
Caitlin Clark goes to war with WNBA over CBA deal
The league’s current proposal would set a maximum base salary of $1 million in 2026, potentially rising above $1.2 million with projected revenue sharing. The average salary would exceed $500,000, and the minimum would surpass $225,000.
The salary cap would jump to five million, up from $1.5 million last season, and be tied to revenue growth. By comparison, the previous CBA offered a 2025 minimum of $66,079 and a supermax of $249,244, with revenue sharing rarely triggered.
On November 18, the league floated a $1.1 million maximum and minimum above $220,000. Clark warned the model would fall short if league growth accelerates.
“That’s why the league put those numbers out,” Clark said. “They knew people were going to be like, ‘Oh, wow, look at those numbers; it’s so much higher.’
“What happens in 2028, 2029 when the league has skyrocketed? Guess where we’re going to be sitting? In the exact same position.”
The league has also proposed removing team housing requirements and extending the season, with training camps potentially starting in mid-March.
Players argue this could interfere with overseas opportunities and affect new entrants from college, whose NCAA commitments often run into April.
“With the proposed season footprint, it’s almost as if the league and teams want exclusivity,” Clark said. “If that’s the case, then make sure we can live and do all these things that you’re asking of us in the best way possible.”
Another controversial measure is a mandatory player combine before the draft, with absences risking loss of half a player’s base salary.
Alongside this, players are seeking to remove restrictive rookie contracts, expand maternity leave for non-birthing parents, and enhance retirement benefits as talks continue; with the WNBPA maintaining that compensation and player rights must reflect the league’s growth.
Read the full article here
