USL Championship season opener in doubt due to continuing CBA negotiations
Uncertainty persists regarding the anticipated commencement of the 2026 USL Championship season, as the USL and the USL Players Association seem to be significantly distant from finalizing a new Collective Bargaining Agreement.
The two parties convened for five hours on Wednesday, with a mediator present to assist in the negotiation process. Although some progress was made on several critical issues, the USL and the USLPA remain considerably apart, rendering an agreement by this weekend quite improbable.
Efforts to establish a new CBA have been ongoing since August 2024. The prior agreement lapsed at the end of 2025, yet both parties have continued to operate under its terms while discussions are underway.
The negotiations are occurring alongside the USL’s initiative to create a distinct Division 1 league that would operate above the USL Championship, as well as to introduce a promotion-relegation system starting as early as 2028.
The USL Championship season is set to kick off on March 6 with a match in Lexington, Ky., featuring Lexington SC against Louisville City FC. The other USL Championship teams are scheduled to compete later that weekend. However, a vote conducted last week by the USLPA membership authorized its bargaining committee to initiate a strike whenever deemed necessary, casting a shadow over the season’s start.
At this moment, it remains unclear whether the USLPA’s bargaining committee will call for a strike this weekend. One source from the union informed ESPN that “Conversations are ongoing,” and that the union is “less than impressed” with the proposal presented by the USL.
Brett Luy, USL president of competition and administration, indicated that both sides are negotiating in good faith, but expressed that the USLPA is not meeting the USL halfway. “We need a willing dance partner here,” he conveyed to ESPN via telephone.
When contacted by phone, USLPA executive director Connor Tobin opted not to provide a comment.
During Wednesday’s session, there was some advancement regarding minimum compensation for players, which encompasses salary and a housing allowance. The USL raised its offer from $38,500 to $40,000 annually, while the USLPA lowered its request from $43,000 to $42,000 per year.
The USL clarified that, in contrast to the previous CBA, health insurance is now categorized as a separate benefit distinct from salary and housing. However, union representatives argued that there is more complexity to the USL’s statement.
The USL is also seeking permission to sign up to four players under what it terms Entry Contracts—previously known as “flex contracts” in the former CBA—offering $33,000 annually in salary and housing allowances. A league source noted that these contracts are intended for players under 23 who would not have otherwise qualified for a USL Championship contract.
Additionally, the USL agreed to eliminate a clause from its proposal that would have permitted it to unilaterally buy out three contracts per team over a two-year period. This had been a significant point of contention for the USLPA in recent weeks, with the union emphasizing that they never consented to the inclusion of such buyouts.
The latest proposal from the USL enhances protections for players on teams that cease operations. According to the USL, its offer stipulates that if a team disbands before December 1 of a given year, players will receive six months of salary. If a team folds between December 1 and the beginning of the subsequent season, affected players would receive nine months of salary and two months of housing. The USLPA countered that both timeframes should also include two months of housing allowances and health insurance.
The USL has also established terms that provide bonuses for players on championship-winning teams as well as for individual accolades. Players will also receive compensation for league-level promotional and personal appearances.
The remaining significant issues were not addressed during Wednesday’s session. These include a requirement for clubs to provide health insurance to players. While both parties agree that this should be part of the CBA, the matter has stalled due to the USL’s proposal that players be given the option to obtain the same policy available to other club employees, while the USLPA insists that all players across the league should have access to the same policy.
The topic of NIL rights, another crucial concern for players, was also not discussed. Players are requesting $625,000, while the league’s offer stands at $125,000.
