Collier: People are seeing that changes need to be made (1:00)Napheesa Collier said that while “nothing has changed” at the league level, she remains confident in the future as the WNBA and players’ union continue to work through ongoing CBA negotiations. (1:00)
The collective bargaining agreement between the WNBA and Women’s National Basketball Players Association will expire in one week. Even if Jan. 9 comes and goes without a new agreement — and as of now all signs point to that scenario — it doesn’t automatically mean a work stoppage would occur. Instead, a period called “status quo” would follow in which the current CBA would be maintained and, even without a new deal in place, the league and union could continue negotiating.
Jump to: How likely is a strike? Strike authorization Why housing is an issue Salary and rev sharing explained
The sides remain far apart on several key issues, including what a revenue sharing system should look like, what should be considered revenue and how to account for expenses.
The projection, sources said, was determined based on previously audited league financial information.
The WNBA views gross revenue as an inaccurate reflection of the business as it doesn’t incorporate the expenses needed to operate teams and the league, while the WNBPA believes players who provide the labor and have no control over expenses shouldn’t essentially be paid last.
The league has previously said that in addition to substantially increasing salaries and other cost commitments, it wants to incentivize owners to continue to invest in operating the business. The WNBA’s tremendous growth in recent years provides an opportunity for the business to go from operating at losses to building sustained profitability.
WNBPA president Nneka Ogwumike told ESPN in a Dec. 19 interview that the league’s revenue share model is “not adequate.” The WNBPA and its players have consistently stressed the importance of creating a new deal that “represents our value in a very meaningful way,” as Ogwumike said, in response to what the union has called “the draconian provisions that have unfairly restricted players for nearly three decades.”
According to a document obtained by ESPN that was shared with players, the WNBPA proposed a compensation system last month with a projected salary cap of approximately $12.5 million in 2026, over eight times the 2025 cap. That Nov. 28 proposal also included approximately a $1 million average player salary and maximum player salary of $2.5 million. Multiple sources familiar with the negotiations told ESPN that in recent weeks the union has proposed a lower salary cap closer to $10.5 million.
These altogether mark the first reported salary figures from the players’ side of the bargaining table. Clearly, there’s still a long gap to bridge between the players’ $10.5 million proposed cap and the league’s $5 million one.
In the aforementioned document obtained by ESPN, the league and the union were proposing maximum salaries that made up 20% of the salary cap. In the last deal, that number, known as the supermax, made up 16.5% of the cap.
One player eligible to receive one-fifth of the cap — and potentially two players accounting for 40% of it — could make for some interesting roster construction decisions. Front offices might bristle at the supermax comprising such a high proportion of the cap, fearing such a number would make it more difficult to build a complete team.
Sure, several teams became contenders by paying their stars well below the supermax ($249,244 in 2025) — four-time MVP A’ja Wilson, for example, made only $200,000 with the Aces last year. But would (or arguably should) stars still be willing to leave a sizable amount of money on the table, particularly if there are seven-figure salaries on the line? Or would income from other leagues, such as Unrivaled and Project B, make that notion more palatable?
The answer to those questions will have downstream effects on everyone else, and some industry insiders have concerns that these proposals could squeeze out the league’s middle class.
“We have been at an average of 16.5% of the salary cap as a supermax in the past few years, and that has still been a big problem,” one agent told ESPN. “Fifteen percent of the cap as a max salary doesn’t make it easy, but it makes it doable, especially if we can get the cap up a bit. Otherwise, you must have almost every max player ready to take a 10-30% salary cut, just to form a competitive team or get real lucky with the quality of your minimum salary players.
“I’m trusting that the PA and the elite players on the executive committee have actually taken out their calculators and are considering this, which is quite important to 75% of the league.” — Alexa Philippou
Caitlin Clark on CBA negotiations: This is biggest moment WNBA has ever seen
In an interview with ESPN last Friday, WNBPA president Nneka Ogwumike described the vote as a “symbol of our unity and the confidence that we have in each other to be able to give ourselves some level of authority in these negotiations.” But she also deemed the move a way to “give ourselves as much leverage as possible to get a good deal done.”
A decision on whether to strike is now not in the hands of the 150-plus players but up to the seven-player WNBPA executive committee.
“This means we could possibly strike if we need to, but it doesn’t mean that we want that to happen,” Ogwumike told ESPN. “But we have it in our arsenal in order for us to get exactly what we need, which is a fair deal that represents our value in a very meaningful way.”
Ogwumike told ESPN that she sees Thursday’s vote as “an opportunity for [a strike] to be an option if negotiations don’t progress,” adding that she believes talks are still “a bit in their infancy.” The WNBA, meanwhile, has repeatedly said in statements that the league “strongly disagree[s] with the WNBPA’s characterization of the current state of negotiations.”
When asked what factors would prompt the executive committee to consider pursuing a strike, Ogwumike responded, “It’s kind of early to even say that, per se.
“That might be a question for something closer to Jan 9. I’m not entirely sure what factors, aside from what we’re looking to get in revenue sharing, could potentially lead us to make a decision on this strike authorization vote.”
The union declined to provide details on the voting procedures the executive committee would follow if voting on a strike.
The 2026 season isn’t expected to tip off until May, so the possibility of canceled games is still far off. But the players could opt to strike before then. The ramifications of a potential strike, or any work stoppage, in the offseason would include losing benefits and team housing for those who still remain in such accommodations.
“You don’t know what’s going to happen, but you want to be prepared for anything that can happen,” Ogwumike said.
A vote to strike would be unprecedented for the WNBA; there has never been a work stoppage in the history of the league. Industry insiders have a range of opinions on the likelihood and merits of a potential strike — particularly one so long before the season starts — as well as the union’s apparent strategy.
“If you’re so far apart [as the union claims], and the negotiations have not gone well, and you have the right to strike at any point in time, why are you not striking?” one industry source said. “If it’s all negative with no progress, what are you waiting for?”
“It’s OK to strike, to me,” one agent told ESPN. “In some cases, walking away, saying no, is a really good part of the strategy in negotiation.”
But not everyone believes the league would be more willing to come closer to the players’ demands with the threat of a strike looming.
“[NBA commissioner] Adam’s [Silver] going to step in and say, ‘Ladies, we’re not moving on this and this and this, but we will do this and this and this,’ and then we’re going to get a deal done early January,'” another agent predicted.
Nonetheless, one common belief among insiders is that for all the potential strike talk, the players and the league understand the importance of having a 2026 season, so it is still unlikely that games will be missed.
Thursday’s announcement made clear that this is not an immediate call for a strike, nor should it be seen as an intention to pursue one. But that decision will now be in the hands of the seven players who make up the WNBPA executive committee: Nneka Ogwumike, Kelsey Plum, Napheesa Collier, Breanna Stewart, Alysha Clark, Elizabeth Williams and Brianna Turner.
The union said 93% of the players participated in the voting, with 98% voting yes, marking an “emphatic affirmation of the players’ confidence in their leadership and their unwavering solidarity against ongoing efforts to divide, conquer, and undervalue them.”
The league has proposed significant salary increases — including a $1 million base salary for the highest-paid players — and a new compensation model. It also proposed that teams would no longer provide housing for players.
Yet with disputes lingering over what a new revenue sharing model should look like, there have been few signs that the players feel like meaningful progress has been made in negotiations — Collier and Stewart echoed as much this week at media day for their 3-on-3 league Unrivaled. Perhaps the union sees Thursday’s move as a way to apply pressure on the league with the threat of a strike.
But if the players continue to believe that the league is embodying “a resistance to change and a recommitment to the draconian provisions that have unfairly restricted players for nearly three decades” as the Jan. 9 deadline approaches, it wouldn’t be shocking to see the executive committee consider moving forward on a strike.
But even before we get to Jan. 9, the CBA extensions have included a provision giving either side the ability to terminate the agreement with 48 hours’ notice, at which point a work stoppage — either a strike initiated by the players or a lockout initiated by the owners — could be pursued.
