Generous salary hikes meet player demands for deeper revenue sharing. Negotiations hit a snag as players push for systemic change, not just raises.
The WNBA’s most recent collective bargaining proposal has not generated the momentum many expected, leaving the league and its players’ union still far apart on a new agreement with the 2026 season edging closer. What began as a wave of optimism following a report earlier in the week has given way to renewed uncertainty after players signaled they were not satisfied with the league’s offer.
The initial reaction came after the Associated Press outlined details of the proposal. According to that report, which cited a person familiar with the negotiations, the WNBA introduced significant changes to its salary structure, including the possibility of a maximum salary exceeding $1.1 million that could be earned by more than one player per team. The proposal also set a new minimum salary above $220,000 and projected an average salary above $460,000, affecting more than 180 players in the first year. All of those figures would rise over the life of the deal.
Those numbers quickly circulated online, prompting widespread belief that the league and the players’ association were nearing the finish line on a new CBA. Many interpreted the financial escalation as a signal that the long process of reshaping the league’s pay system was nearing a breakthrough.
Two days later, that perception shifted. The players’ union did not view the reported framework as a meaningful step toward resolving the deeper issues underpinning the negotiations.
That perspective was detailed by WNBA reporter Alexa Philippou during an appearance on ESPN’s “NBA Today,” where she addressed the union’s reaction to the proposal.
“I’m hearing that the players and the WNBPA do not feel like this proposal moves things forward,” Philippou said. She noted that although the salary figures appeared to be substantial, the changes did not address the area players consider most important: tying league compensation directly to league revenue.
Philippou said the players have been consistent throughout the process in calling for a compensation model that expands as the business expands. “What they want — and the players have been really consistent in this message — is that they feel that the salary system needs to grow with the business. And so far, this proposal does not include that to the extent they have been asking for,” she said.
She also emphasized that the two sides remain separated by enough unresolved issues that a new agreement does not appear imminent. “There’s a lot of work left to be done in bargaining for them to move this forward into the direction that we could be talking about a deal anytime soon,” Philippou said.
One of the biggest remaining unknowns is what type of revenue-sharing mechanism would satisfy the players. Philippou said the specifics of such a system are still unclear within the union, and that players are seeking clarity about how revenue would be calculated and distributed under any new model.
For now, negotiations are expected to continue without a clear timeline. The league’s latest proposal represented one of the most aggressive salary structures ever offered, but the core disagreement — how pay should be tied to the league’s financial performance — remains unresolved, leaving the shape of the next CBA still undetermined.