WNBA: CBA negotiations on the brink, how to reach an agreement?

The WNBA Faces a Crucial Labor Agreement Before the Start of the 2026 Season

Less than 100 days before the start of the 2026 WNBA season, scheduled for May 8th, the league finds itself at a critical juncture. Before the tip-off, several key issues must be resolved, including the expansion draft for the Portland and Toronto teams, the signing of contracts for more than 100 free agents, and the recruitment of rookies for their respective teams. However, the most significant challenge is reaching a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the league and the players, a process that has been ongoing for 15 months. After the deadline of January 9, both parties entered a “status quo” period, maintaining the conditions of the 2020 agreement. Since then, the stalemate has persisted. The Women’s National Basketball Players Association (WNBPA) is still awaiting an official response from the league to its proposal submitted a month ago. The league, for its part, considers that the proposal does not warrant a response, as it does not differ significantly from the previous ones presented by the union. Internal sources suggest that the league is waiting for a more “realistic” proposal from the players. With the start of the season getting closer and a schedule full of pending tasks, time is of the essence for both parties to reach an agreement. Multiple sources indicate that the only way to resolve this is through compromise. “That is literally what a negotiation is,” commented a player. The analysis of Alofoke Deportes reveals possible avenues to reach an agreement.

Mutual Agreement on Revenue Distribution

According to the league’s proposals, players would see significant salary increases at the beginning of the new CBA, with the highest-paid surpassing one million dollars. In addition, for the first time, each player’s salary would be directly linked to the league’s success, growing as the business expands. However, one of the main obstacles is the lack of agreement on how the revenue distribution will work under the new agreement. The league has proposed that players receive, on average, 70% of net revenue during the term of the agreement, while the players have proposed to receive 30% of gross revenue (net revenue is defined as revenue after deducting expenses, while gross revenue is revenue before deducting expenses). Sources have indicated that it is unlikely that the owners will concede significantly on their position on revenue distribution, although there is room for maneuver in the costs of other expenses that they would incur under the players’ current proposal. The league has stated that its priorities are not only to increase the compensation of the players, but also to incentivize the owners to continue investing, amid the opportunity to move from decades of operating at a loss to sustained profitability.

The players have generally expressed that the percentage of gross revenue they are requesting “represents our value” and “is not too much,” as Napheesa Collier indicated earlier this month. It is unclear to what extent, if any, the players are willing to concede. The union continues to point to the increasing valuations of the franchises and the league’s new media deal as signs of a significant influx of revenue that owners can access, and there is a feeling among some on the players’ side that team owners who cannot afford to keep up with the league’s wealthier owners should sell their franchises. Others have wondered if it would be more beneficial for the players to obtain the revenue distribution they can now, possibly seek a short-term deal, and, assuming the business continues to grow as expected, fight for an even better slice of the pie in the next round of negotiations, where they would have even more influence.

Finding a Middle Ground in Housing

The provision of housing by the team emerged as a point of tension in the negotiations in December 2025. Since the first CBA was ratified in 1999, teams have been required to provide housing to all players from training camp through the playoffs. If players choose not to live in the housing provided by the team, they receive a stipend, the maximum of which depends on the market. Multiple sources indicated that the majority of players use the team’s housing instead of opting to receive the stipend. Regardless of the details of revenue distribution and the salary cap, WNBA salaries will increase substantially. Those pending increases introduced the question of whether team-provided housing remains a necessary cost for franchises. But not only would full-time players with guaranteed salaries be affected. WNBA franchises can have a maximum of 12 players (many currently only have 11 due to the existing salary cap), but only six of those salaries are guaranteed. Throughout a season, teams could also sign players to short-term contracts. Even with the increases, finding and securing housing would be a significant burden for those players.

“Housing for all players remains a priority, especially for those with non-guaranteed contracts and international players,” said a player. “But I think this is one of the most difficult issues for the league for whatever reason.”

The NFL, NBA, NHL, MLS, and MLB do not provide housing throughout the season for players. The NWSL has a plan to gradually eliminate team-provided housing by 2027, but that plan has stipulations for players who do not have high salaries and/or are in expensive markets. In a WNBA CBA agreement, a similar type of commitment is expected to be seen when it comes to salary and market variability.

Highlight the Successes

For months, the players’ association’s narrative has insisted that the league’s proposals are so far from adequate that they are insulting. That is not an unusual tactic for a union in such disputes. But sources external to the WNBPA have indicated that the union could benefit from beginning to speak more optimistically about the successes it seems to have even before the deal is closed. Reducing acrimony does not mean sacrificing the union’s strengths. One of the biggest successes, for example, is the proposed maximum salary of more than $1 million per season, a major financial milestone for WNBA players. In addition, the average salary is expected to at least triple, also a big step for the union. Although the parameters of the income distribution are still being debated, the eventual terms are projected to be a significant improvement over the last CBA. When that agreement was signed in January 2020, most observers anticipated that the use of charter flights to and from WNBA games would be a major battleground issue in the next CBA. However, charter flights arrived in 2024, outside of collective bargaining, and that aspect of travel is expected to be codified in this agreement. That is also a union victory. Also, the general increase in the commitment and unity of the players that the players’ association has fostered since the last CBA. That has strengthened the players’ position for this labor agreement and subsequent agreements. The key to reaching a successful conclusion in labor negotiations is for both parties to feel confident that gains have been made. Therefore, an effective strategy for the players’ association could be to subtly shift their focus towards union victories.

Restore Trust

On January 14, 2020, Commissioner Cathy Engelbert and union president Nneka Ogwumike sat together and announced an eight-year CBA. Both were wearing blue, Ogwumike in a royal blue dress and Engelbert in a navy blue blazer, as they shared the news of their agreement on “Good Morning America”. “We are very proud of the players and their ability to come together on issues important to them,” Engelbert said. “While they negotiated hard, we came together, collaborated, and have what we believe is a groundbreaking agreement that will support these players for the long term.” These were different times. This was before COVID-19 upended the world and severely impacted sports seasons. Before the activism of the players during the bubble season that followed and led to the sale of the Atlanta Dream by former U.S. Senator Kelly Loeffler and the players campaigning for her eventual replacement in the Senate, Raphael Warnock. This was before the 2022 capital raise that further complicated the WNBA’s ownership structure. It was before the explosion of women’s basketball popularity, fueled by Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese. It was before the behind-the-scenes dissatisfaction with Engelbert’s leadership became public when Collier criticized the commissioner during her 2025 exit interview. It was before there was a major breakdown of trust between the league and its players. As things stand, the WNBA and the WNBPA are struggling to do what Engelbert boasted about in 2020: collaborate. Instead, the two sides have thrown indirects and, in doing so, have eroded much of the mutual trust, leading each side to question whether the other is negotiating in good faith. Ogwumike indicated this when asked about the league’s projection that the WNBPA’s current proposal would lead to losses of $700 million, stating that she feels that “the league and the teams saying they are losing money is like saying their pockets are empty while also holding the keys to a new Ferrari.” The union’s vice president, Breanna Stewart, indicated that she would like to meet face-to-face with the league’s owners, a sentiment that other sources have echoed as a possible route to consider. Allowing the main stakeholders to engage in a dialogue and listen to each other, directly and not through layers of lawyers and intermediaries, could be more productive in helping to break the deadlock and reach an agreement.

“At some point, it’s enough,” he said. “Personally, I want to be in the room talking about the real things that are happening. These meetings are so diverted by language, jargon, and context. We are missing the point.”