He posted a letter on Twitter Monday from his lawyers Ben Meiselas and Ray Genco to NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith explaining the differences in the two deals.
"The change in CBA language after the vote, even if it were minor, is a big deal and grounds for invalidation," Reid tweeted. "But here the change has a major and direct impact on hundreds MORE disabled players and their families. Investigate. Invalidate."
The notable changes involve the league's disability plan, potentially reducing the payouts to at least hundreds of former players.
Reid is calling to investigate the changes while invalidating the current CBA.
Meiselas explained the CBA "takes from disabled players" and the changes mean a re-vote is "the only logical answer." He broke down his client's position, via ESPN:
"Eric's letter demands the invalidation and an investigation and a re-vote because how do you stick in language that players didn't know they were voting for? It's perplexing and concerning even if the changes were minor that there was no transparency and no explanation. But here, the changes are major and drastically and dramatically impact disability benefits to players."
The players approved the CBA in a close vote that ended 1019-959 in favor of the changes, securing certainty through 2030.
As Dan Graziano of ESPN noted, several notable players were against the proposed CBA, including J.J. Watt, Russell Wilson, Aaron Rodgers and Russell Okung, while the NFLPA executive council voted 6-5 against recommending the deal.
The deal was still ratified, going into effect for the 2020 season. Dozens of players have since agreed to new contracts at the start of the new league year, which could create further issues if the CBA was voided.