It has been more than three weeks since the WNBA and WNBA Players Association announced that they had agreed to a 30-day extension of their current collective bargaining agreement, which means we are just over a week away from the new deadline of Nov. 30.
At the beginning of this month, I presented the case for optimism that a deal would be reached. There is so much money coming into the league, enough riches to go around to make all parties satisfied enough to come to an agreement that would help keep the league’s massive wave of momentum going.
Earlier this week, the WNBA’s most recent offer to the players leaked, with headlines that made the proposal sound pretty enticing, with a possible maximum salary above $1.1 million, a minimum salary of more than $220,000 and an average salary of more than $460,000. In 2025, the league’s minimum salary was around $66,000 and its supermax was about $250,000.
These are eye-popping numbers, and a source told the Associated Press that this was “a highly lucrative package providing substantial increases over prior years and designed to bring negotiations to a quick conclusion.”
So, great news, right?
Well, not so fast. These numbers are a bit misleading, because no player would sign a contract for a base salary of above $1 million, according to Front Office Sports. Rather, in 2026, the base supermax would still be around the $850,000, but revenue sharing would potentially lift max salaries above the $1 million range. The WNBPA “does not view the WNBA’s latest collective bargaining agreement proposal as something that moves negotiations forward,” according to ESPN.
Ultimately, it seems that the two sides are still operating under two different financial frameworks.
Last October, when the WNBPA announced its decision to opt out of the current CBA, which went into place in 2020, WNBPA president Nneka Ogwumike said that players weren’t simply seeking more money; rather, they were looking to change the foundation of compensation for women’s sports.
“We are ready to lead transformational change — change that goes beyond women’s sports and sets a precedent for something greater,” Ogwumike said. “Opting out isn’t just about bigger paychecks — it’s about claiming our rightful share of the business we’ve built, improving working conditions, and securing a future where the success we create benefits today’s players and the generations to come. We’re not just asking for a CBA that reflects our value; we’re demanding it, because we’ve earned it.”
In the year since, WNBA commissioner Cathy Engelbert has often echoed that language. But there does not seem to be an agreement on what “transformational” means.
Players are seeking a deal that directly ties the salaries to a percentage of basketball-related income. Many sports leagues, like the NBA, split revenue 50-50 with players, but it is estimated that WNBA players only receive less than 10% of league revenue. In the current CBA, players have fixed salaries that increase by 3% every year and revenue sharing is only triggered if predetermined, cumulative targets are met. The current CBA was written before the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the 2020 season and, because of the way the revenue-sharing targets were calculated, they were never triggered despite the massive increase in revenue the WNBA has experienced in the past few years. Players do not want to sign a deal that would see them left behind if the business continues to boom.
The current deal on the table from the WNBA does seem to include a revenue-sharing component, which is how players on a max salary would potentially earn more than $1.1 million despite signing a contract for $850,000. But ESPN reported that “sources told ESPN the players’ union does not believe the league’s proposal includes a system where the salary cap and player salaries sufficiently grow with the business.”
In order to reach a new deal, one of two things would need to happen: The WNBA would need to adopt the revenue-sharing framework that the WNBPA is proposing or the WNBA would need to boost fixed salary numbers high enough that players are willing to forego the fight for the revenue-share model of their dreams.
If neither of those things happen, a work stoppage is likely.
If there is no deal reached by the new Nov. 30 deadline, the players and league could agree on another extension. If neither happens, that does not automatically mean that a lockout goes into effect — the status quo could remain in tact, which would allow players to continue to have access to team facilities and staff while negotiations continue. But if there is no official extension in place, the players or league could trigger a lockout at any given time. Hopefully, a transformational compromise can be reached before that happens.
Add Comment