The 2025 WNBA All-Star Game in Indianapolis is remembered not for the play but for a statement: every All-Star wore a black T‑shirt reading “Pay Us What You Owe Us” during warmups, signaling frustration in collective bargaining talks between the Women’s National Basketball Players Association and the league. The show of unity — all 22 All‑Stars agreed — underscored longstanding player solidarity even as individuals face very different financial and career realities. Some players are wealthy from endorsements; others depend mainly on WNBA pay, which in 2025 ranged from $66,079 (minimum) to $249,244 (supermax). Some are rookies, some near retirement, many are parents or internationals, and some have ownership stakes or co‑founded new leagues.
With the WNBPA and WNBA pursuing what both call a transformational CBA and a Nov. 30 deadline looming, the stakes vary by group. Below is a look at how different players and interests could be affected.
Negotiator: Terri Jackson, WNBPA executive director
Jackson, WNBPA executive director since 2016, helped secure the 2020 CBA’s big gains: pay increases, improved free agency and better benefits for mothers and parental leave. Once cooperative with commissioner Cathy Engelbert, relations have cooled, and the union has taken a more public, critical approach this round, including the All‑Star shirts. A dramatically improved CBA would be a legacy achievement for Jackson; keeping rank‑and‑file members confident that their needs are protected while maintaining unity among high‑profile stars is central to her role.
Superstars with large off‑court incomes
Key examples: Caitlin Clark, A’ja Wilson, Sabrina Ionescu, Angel Reese, Paige Bueckers.
Top stars with major endorsement deals can better withstand a work stoppage and have flexibility in contract decisions. They rely on WNBA visibility for those endorsement opportunities, though, and many could choose to take lower WNBA salaries to assemble competitive rosters under a cap once free agency opens. How the new CBA changes players’ willingness or need to take pay cuts remains to be seen.
Role players
Key examples: Kiah Stokes, Natisha Hiedeman, Lindsay Allen.
This group is heterogeneous: some earn well overseas or from alternative leagues like Unrivaled or Athletes Unlimited, while others depend primarily on WNBA income. A substantial salary increase or more roster spots would materially improve their financial security and career opportunities; a work stoppage would hurt them the most.
Players on rookie contracts
Key examples: Kiki Iriafen, Aaliyah Edwards, Maddy Siegrist.
Many rookies lack significant off‑court income, so increases to the minimum salary are crucial. When the minimum rose 36% in 2020, rookie pay followed; industry speculation this round suggests the minimum could rise substantially, even quadruple, which would benefit recent draftees. At the same time, young players want to preserve long‑term earning upside and avoid locking in terms that limit future earnings.
Players nearing retirement
Key examples: DeWanna Bonner, Alysha Clark, Sami Whitcomb, Tina Charles.
Veterans approaching the end of their careers prioritize retirement benefits. The WNBA currently offers a 401(k); many players seek a pension similar to the NBA’s, based on years of service and average salary, to ensure past and future players receive long‑term support.
Players on the roster bubble
Key examples: Kiana Williams, Haley Jones, Elizabeth Kitley.
Expansion (Portland Fire and Toronto Tempo in 2026) adds at least 24 roster spots and potentially more if rosters grow. Increasing roster sizes or adding an injured list would help fringe players financially and developmentally, replacing last‑minute hardship call‑ups with stable opportunities to grow within teams.
International players
Key examples: Gabby Williams, Emma Meesseman, Satou Sabally.
Prioritization and reporting rules matter most here. Strict requirements to report for training camp have previously limited availability for internationals and national team duties. Any push for exclusivity or restrictions on representing national teams outside major events would force difficult choices for players balancing club, country and international club commitments.
WNBA executive committee members with interests in other leagues
Key examples: Napheesa Collier, Breanna Stewart, Nneka Ogwumike.
Three executive‑committee members have stakes in new leagues: Collier and Stewart co‑founded Unrivaled (a 3‑on‑3 league) and Ogwumike signed with Project B (a proposed international 5‑on‑5 circuit). They insist these ventures aren’t competitors and deny conflicts of interest, but success of alternative leagues could lessen top players’ dependence on the WNBA. If prioritization provisions become central to the CBA, these executives may face hard choices about balancing incomes across leagues.
Players with kids
Key examples: Dearica Hamby, Skylar Diggins.
The 2020 CBA made major gains for parents: full salary during parental leave, childcare stipends, nursing accommodations and minimum housing accommodations for players with children. Extending family planning benefits beyond players with eight or more years in the league is a key priority for parents and many others.
Star players with less off‑court income
Key examples: Kelsey Mitchell, Alyssa Thomas, Brionna Jones, Natasha Howard.
Some high‑paid WNBA players lack major endorsement income and therefore have less flexibility to accept lower WNBA pay to fit teams under a cap. Core designations (which allow a team to give a one‑year qualifying offer at the maximum but block free agency) affect player control; recent CBAs reduced core eligibility from three years to two, and further changes could restore mobility for some veterans.
Future WNBA players
Key examples: JuJu Watkins, Flau’jae Johnson, Sarah Strong, Lauren Betts.
While current college players aren’t at the bargaining table, they’re watching closely. The next CBA will shape rookie pay, draft eligibility rules and the attractiveness of the WNBA for the next generation. Changes to age or eligibility thresholds would affect when top prospects can enter the league.
Across these groups, common levers at stake include salary floors and maximums, roster sizes and expansion, benefits (parental, health and retirement), prioritization and international rules, and rules governing free agency and core designations. How negotiations resolve those issues will determine whether the next CBA broadens opportunity and security for WNBA players across the spectrum or primarily benefits certain subsets.
