To get it done, the JPBPA is preparing a legal challenge to the league\u2019s reserve system on antitrust grounds. Tak Yamazaki, outside counsel to the Japan Professional Baseball Players Association, said he could not specify exactly when the action will be brought, but that it would be this year.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt will happen soon,\u201d Yamazaki said.<\/p>\n
Players in Japan have two forms of free agency: domestic and international. Domestic free agency, the freedom to switch to another NPB team, is achieved after seven or eight years in the league, depending on whether the player was drafted out of college or high school.<\/p>\n
But to leave as a free agent for a foreign league like MLB, the wait is nine years. Players can depart sooner, but only if their team posts them for bidding. Instead, NPB players want what\u2019s in place in MLB: free agency after a blanket six years, regardless of entry or destination.<\/p>\n
The two-pronged push for change is remarkable for a players\u2019 association that does not have the same might as its U.S. counterpart. Club owners hold most of the power in NPB, in part because labor unions in Japan are generally not as strong as they are in the United States. Coincidentally, next month marks the 20th anniversary of the only strike NPB players have held in their history, a two-day effort to stave off club contraction<\/a>.<\/p>\n A second NPB player strike does not appear to be in the offing any time soon. But the JPBPA regards the body that oversees antitrust law, Japan\u2019s Fair Trade Commission, as perhaps the best vehicle to attack the reserve system. That\u2019s a relatively new development: in 2019, the commission issued a report that gave the nation\u2019s athletes newfound leverage.<\/p>\n \u201cThere was legal argument whether antitrust law is applied to sports matters,\u201d Yamazaki said. \u201cThey changed the interpretation, making it clear that the antitrust law will apply. \u2026 That has changed the whole landscape.\u201d<\/p>\n One smaller test case in front of the commission has already gone the JPBPA\u2019s way, leading to the repeal of an unwritten rule<\/a> in NPB in 2020. The \u201cTazawa Rule\u201d was named for former big-league pitcher Junichi Tazawa, who had been effectively barred from playing in NPB at the end of his time playing in the U.S. because he had skipped NPB\u2019s amateur draft to pursue a major-league career.<\/p>\n A person briefed on management\u2019s thinking who was not authorized to speak publicly said NPB has been preparing for this next challenge, and that the league has proposed reducing the time to domestic free agency. The offer did not include a reduction with international free agency.<\/p>\n \u201cSix and seven years was on the table at the end of January,\u201d the person said. \u201cIf they were willing to negotiate several months ago, I think we would have been able to successfully come to an agreement before Opening Day.\u201d<\/p>\n Yamazaki said the league\u2019s offer was more complex than a straight reduction.<\/p>\n The other change NPB players seek, to their NIL rights, creates a contrast to the U.S., where NIL is a relatively settled matter in pro leagues. But it\u2019s been a dominant topic in college athletics<\/a>, reshaping the NCAA<\/a>.<\/p>\n The JPBPA intends to continue to pursue player NIL rights via negotiation. Theoretically, though, the players could also take up an antitrust fight in that space, too. The topic is longstanding. The players sued over publicity rights on different grounds back in 2002, and years later, the case wound up in the Supreme Court of Japan, where the league prevailed.<\/p>\n But that was before 2019. An antitrust case in the U.S. was notably at the center of vast change of NIL for college athletes, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the NCAA in 2021<\/a>.<\/p>\n NPB teams take a cut of player endorsements, and the clubs are protective of their own sponsors.<\/p>\n \u201cThere will be a certain amount of commission, and also it is not absolutely free (choice),\u201d Yamazaki said. \u201cFor example, if a company that is offering an endorsement deal to the player is a competitor of club sponsors, it can be denied. Also, for example, setting up a YouTube channel: some clubs allow it, but some clubs don\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n The person briefed on NPB management thinking contended that because the clubs have been successful in merchandising, the current setup allows players to maximize their income. Clark, meanwhile, believes players can unlock greater value in group licensing. International unions have \u201crarely, if at all \u2026 taken advantage of or realized the value of their name, image and likeness rights,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n \u201cWe believe there\u2019s a better opportunity on the heels of (Shohei) Ohtani coming here, and on the heels of nearly a third of our membership at the major-league level being international, to build on that in a way that hasn\u2019t happened yet,\u201d Clark continued.<\/p>\n The MLBPA is billing its involvement as a business opportunity, not just union camaraderie. When Clark traveled to the city of Sapporo last month, he announced that the MLBPA and a licensing business it owns about 20 percent of, OneTeam Partners, are going \u201cto support Japanese players in reclaiming their NIL rights from Nippon Professional Baseball (NPB) and to manage these rights in the future through the creation of a commercial program, run by OneTeam International,\u201d per a memo the MLBPA sent to its players.<\/p>\n MLBPA head Tony Clark traveled to Japan to assist in union efforts there. (Daniel Shirey \/ MLB Photos via Getty Images)<\/p>\n The JPBPA became a union<\/a> in 1985. That\u2019s almost two decades after the MLBPA created a group licensing program in 1966. Big leaguers at the time quickly began a boycott of Topps<\/a>, in effort to force the trading card company to deal with the players en masse.<\/p>\n Today, that licensing program brings in huge dollars for players and the union. A financial statement the MLBPA filed with the Department of Labor lists $152 million in net licensing royalties for 2023, although that figure doesn\u2019t account for every stream.<\/p>\n The work requires enforcement. Just last week, the PA\u2019s business arm sued the Pittsburgh Pirates<\/a> and the gas station chain Sheetz for alleged unlicensed use of player images. A settlement has been tentatively agreed to. But the income has ripple effects: the funds help players prepare for work stoppages, creating bargaining leverage.<\/p>\n Clark acknowledged the MLBPA\u2019s support for the Japanese players comes with costs to players stateside, but said players will benefit stateside as well.<\/p>\n \u201cSomeone may look at it from the outside in and suggest, \u2018OK, well, that really doesn\u2019t affect me,\u2019 but the truth is, the global sports community is more connected than people think,\u201d Clark said. \u201cYes, there is a financial investment. Yes, there is a sweat equity component of this.\u201d<\/p>\n Per the MLBPA memo, OneTeam\u2019s international division, which was started this year, is also in partnership talks with football and soccer unions across England, Italy, France, as well as the International Rugby Players Association and various unions across Australia and New Zealand. However, the memo did not touch on the JPBPA\u2019s reserve-system battle \u2014 an omission perhaps made out of sensitivity to another union\u2019s bargaining positions.<\/p>\n Cultural chasms<\/p>\n When the MLBPA started its group licensing program, the union was run by the late Marvin Miller, an economist who rose to prominence with the steelworkers and built the PA into a titan. Miller\u2019s son, Peter, is a longtime resident of Japan who served as a consultant to the MLBPA in Japan from 1994 to 2011.<\/p>\n Peter Miller said the relationship between players and owners in his time was \u201cvery different from the adversarial relationship that is considered essential in U.S labor-management relations.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cFor example, when they called a strike, they expressed remorse to the fans,\u201d Miller said. \u201cBecause it was just really not part of the culture at all<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n Yet, at the same time, the JPBPA has also stood out amongst unions in the country according to Matt Nichol, a lecturer who studies sports law and labor in the College of Business at Central Queensland University in Australia.<\/p>\n \u201cEven though the Japanese players\u2019 union doesn\u2019t have the strike history that the MLBPA does, and there wasn\u2019t that period of industrial action from the formation of the MLBPA through to the strike in 1994, for Japan, the Players Association is quite a militant union,\u201d Nichol said. \u201cLitigating over NIL \u2026 taking on the league when they tried to reduce the teams from 12 to 10. Those actions by the Players Association are quite important, and quite dramatic in the context of Japanese labor relations. So the JPBPA is becoming more assertive.\u201d<\/p>\n The differences between the two countries\u2019 systems are vast. For example: There is no set term for the collective bargaining agreement in NPB, creating a rolling nature of negotiations, as opposed to the five-year terms MLB players and owners agree to. NPB players also don\u2019t always explore free agency, even when eligible.<\/p>\n \u201cPlayers, when they become free agents, don\u2019t always change teams, so there\u2019s not a huge free-agent market like in the U.S.,\u201d Nichol said. \u201cIn the last 10, 15 years, players have been moving domestically a little bit more with free agency, but it\u2019s nothing like the U.S.\u201d<\/p>\n In some ways, NPB operates \u201cprobably a bit fairer system\u201d than what\u2019s in place in MLB, according to Nichol, who noted teams rarely release players midseason. NPB also has a smaller gap between the highest and lowest paid players and has long provided housing accommodations to minor leaguers \u2014 a contrast to the U.S., where minor leaguers took up a public fight for housing in recent years.<\/p>\n The person briefed on NPB management\u2019s thinking made similar points, and argued it was folly to compare the reserve systems in the two countries.<\/p>\n \u201cWe only have one minor-league level,\u201d the person said. \u201cIf you sign out of college, on average, you will make it (to the major-league level) in less than two years. That, plus seven years, means about nine years.<\/p>\n \u201cBut in Major League Baseball, in America\u2019s case, you have to spend about an average of four years in the minors. Plus six years free agency. So, 10 years. Although it\u2019s a long reserve system, you would spend less number of years at the minor-league level in Japan.\u201d<\/p>\n NPB players today sometimes do leave for the U.S. sooner than nine years, but only when their club chooses to post them for bidding. And the best players bring NPB teams hefty payments. The Los Angeles Dodgers<\/a>, for example, paid the Orix Buffaloes $50.6 million to sign Yoshinobu Yamamoto<\/a> last offseason, on top of the $325 million the Dodgers committed to the pitcher in salary over 12 years.<\/p>\n The posting agreement \u2014 which determines that club-to-club fee structure \u2014 is technically separate from the reserve system. But, if the NPB reserve system changes, there\u2019s a clause allowing the posting agreement to be changed. The posting agreement is actually a deal amongst three parties: MLB, MLBPA and NPB. The players in Japan are not formally a party, but Yamazaki said the MLPBA has well represented their interests.<\/p>\n Former MLB pitcher Junichi Tazawa\u2019s case helped set a precedent for player movement in Japan. (Chris Covatta \/ Getty Images)<\/p>\n More than the number of years to free agency, what might be most pressing to NPB players is who decides it. The MLBPA toppled club control over the reserve system in the 1970s.<\/p>\n \u201cOur reserve system, just like back in pre-1976 MLB, has been unilaterally imposed by the clubs,\u201d Yamazaki said. \u201cThat\u2019s the biggest difference between the MLBPA and the JPBPA.\u201d<\/p>\n Working in the JPBPA\u2019s favor could be the success it has had in front of Japan\u2019s antitrust administration already.<\/p>\n The Tazawa Rule forbade a player who skips the league\u2019s amateur draft from joining NPB until at least two years following the conclusion of his career abroad. It was intended to deter players from bolting for MLB. Tazawa made 388 appearances in MLB from 2009-18, mostly for the Boston Red Sox<\/a>, \u00a0but he could not play in NPB once returning home.<\/p>\n In 2020, the JFTC found the NPB had likely violated the law. NPB repealed the rule during the investigation, so no discipline was issued. Now, the JPBPA could try to repeat that playbook: using the complaint to pressure change.<\/p>\n Money on the table?<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/mlb\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/tony.clark_.1027-scaled-e1698457757194.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/mlb\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/GettyImages-1038817608-1-scaled.jpg\")
<\/p>\n