Soccer equal pay ruling

#54
#54
n_huffhines said:
I guess wait and see? Why do you think US soccer is going to say "no"?

It should be so obvious to everyone that US soccer should pay the men and women the same % of whatever revenue their teams generate, but everybody just wants pick a side and say the women get nothing or everything. It's so stupid, but this is American politics.[/QUOTE]
Honestly, if the women were offered the same deal as the men, I'm not sure they take it.
Click to expand...
 
#55
#55
Honestly, US Soccer should just pay the women more for the optics, if nothing else. Why get dragged through the mud over a paltry amount of money the men likely don't even care about?
 
#56
#56
tvolsfan said:
Honestly, US Soccer should just pay the women more for the optics, if nothing else. Why get dragged through the mud over a paltry amount of money the men likely don't even care about?
Click to expand...
I'd rather US soccer take that paltry amount and invest in an actual youth system that's affordable for the best young American athletes. Screw the spoiled screaming children.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Godfatha
#57
#57
Women’s Soccer Negotiated the Compensation They Now Say Is Sexist

The women’s team collectively bargained for and won a pay structure that guarantees them salaries, severance pay, medical benefits, and some performance-based bonuses. The women’s team wanted the security of salary-based pay rather than purely performance-based pay, and they wanted to guarantee a salary even for players who were on the roster but didn’t play.

By contrast, the men are strictly pay-for-play. They do not receive a salary or additional benefits like health insurance or severance pay. Their pay structure is performance-based. As Michael McCann, who directs the Sports and Entertainment Law Institute at the University of New Hampshire School of Law told Minnesota Public Radio, “The two systems [for paying women and men] are designed differently . . . The men’s system pays players when they play, through bonuses, whereas the system for women’s players has guaranteed pay and also pays for certain bonuses as well. But it’s structured differently.”

But it’s disingenuous of the women’s team to claim they aren’t getting “equal pay” when they are the ones who agreed to a payment structure that is different from the men’s team.
 
#58
#58
dobre_shunka said:
Women’s Soccer Negotiated the Compensation They Now Say Is Sexist

The women’s team collectively bargained for and won a pay structure that guarantees them salaries, severance pay, medical benefits, and some performance-based bonuses. The women’s team wanted the security of salary-based pay rather than purely performance-based pay, and they wanted to guarantee a salary even for players who were on the roster but didn’t play.

By contrast, the men are strictly pay-for-play. They do not receive a salary or additional benefits like health insurance or severance pay. Their pay structure is performance-based. As Michael McCann, who directs the Sports and Entertainment Law Institute at the University of New Hampshire School of Law told Minnesota Public Radio, “The two systems [for paying women and men] are designed differently . . . The men’s system pays players when they play, through bonuses, whereas the system for women’s players has guaranteed pay and also pays for certain bonuses as well. But it’s structured differently.”

But it’s disingenuous of the women’s team to claim they aren’t getting “equal pay” when they are the ones who agreed to a payment structure that is different from the men’s team.
Click to expand...

The article is suspiciously missing a date on this, so how can you claim these women are the ones that negotiated this deal? The article also never actually quotes anybody calling the deal "sexist". Weird.

If the women negotiated for a deal 10 years ago that was fair then, and now their revenue is a lot closer to the men's revenue, why shouldn't they try to renegotiate for more $? Especially considering most of the players from 10 years ago won't be on the next WC team (and probably weren't on this last one, either). There is a lot of turnover on national soccer teams.

Cool, bias-confirming article though, bro.
 
#59
#59
n_huffhines said:
The article is suspiciously missing a date on this, so how can you claim these women are the ones that negotiated this deal? The article also never actually quotes anybody calling the deal "sexist". Weird.

If the women negotiated for a deal 10 years ago that was fair then, and now their revenue is a lot closer to the men's revenue, why shouldn't they try to renegotiate for more $? Especially considering most of the players from 10 years ago won't be on the next WC team (and probably weren't on this last one, either). There is a lot of turnover on national soccer teams.

Cool, bias-confirming article though, bro.
Click to expand...
Looks like it was done a very recent 2 years ago....

Long Days, Google Docs and Anonymous Surveys: How the U.S. Soccer Team Forged a Deal

This one breaks down the deal with changes and benefits a little better...

USWNT CBA a victory for all American women’s players, not just the best
 
Last edited:
#61
#61
n_huffhines said:
The article is suspiciously missing a date on this, so how can you claim these women are the ones that negotiated this deal? The article also never actually quotes anybody calling the deal "sexist". Weird.

If the women negotiated for a deal 10 years ago that was fair then, and now their revenue is a lot closer to the men's revenue, why shouldn't they try to renegotiate for more $? Especially considering most of the players from 10 years ago won't be on the next WC team (and probably weren't on this last one, either). There is a lot of turnover on national soccer teams.

Cool, bias-confirming article though, bro.
Click to expand...
Any simple Google search shows that they collectively bargained for their salaries in 2017. It's widely public knowledge.

So again, you're being an ass for no obvious reason.
 
#62
#62
TheDeeble said:
Looks like it was done a very recent 2 years ago....

Long Days, Google Docs and Anonymous Surveys: How the U.S. Soccer Team Forged a Deal
Click to expand...

Thanks, this clarifies a lot.

So they started pushing for equal pay 3 years ago, in 2016. They didn't get it, but they got something. They promised to not let this interrupt WC 2019, and the deal ends in 2021. So there is nothing hypocritical about this deal and their continued position that they want equal pay. @dobre_shunka was claiming they chose security over equal pay, but that's not what happened. Equal pay was not on the table. They took what they could get and pushed the fight to another day.
 
#63
#63
volfanngatorland said:
Good info. Thanks

I wonder why this isn’t being reported? (I think I have a good idea why)
Click to expand...

What do you mean? It's right there in the NYT.

Just because they accepted that deal doesn't mean it's what they wanted. The article suggests otherwise. This is why they continued to push for equal pay. There was no moment where they were like "oh, we're happy with this" and then suddenly became unhappy again.
 
#64
#64
n_huffhines said:
Thanks, this clarifies a lot.

So they started pushing for equal pay 3 years ago, in 2016. They didn't get it, but they got something. They promised to not let this interrupt WC 2019, and the deal ends in 2021. So there is nothing hypocritical about this deal and their continued position that they want equal pay. @dobre_shunka was claiming they chose security over equal pay, but that's not what happened. Equal pay was not on the table. They took what they could get and pushed the fight to another day.
Click to expand...
The USWNT changed their own language from "equal" to "equitable" because even they realize getting the same deal as the USMNT is very difficult. Men are paid based on playtime. The USWNT wanted guaranteed pay for all players,

This is why the USWNT started changing its language recently. Sauerbrunn recently told SI’s Grant Wahl on a podcast that “equitable” was a better word to use:

“We’re trying to figure out where women’s soccer is going, so we may not have the same exact structure as the men. So equal isn’t the right word. It would be equitable, because we are asking for a different structure.”​
Click to expand...

USWNT CBA a victory for all American women’s players, not just the best
 
#65
#65
TheDeeble said:
The USWNT changed their own language from "equal" to "equitable" because even they realize getting the same deal as the USMNT is very difficult. Men are paid based on playtime. The USWNT wanted guaranteed pay for all players

USWNT CBA a victory for all American women’s players, not just the best
Click to expand...

This is not relevant to my point. They were not satisfied with the deal, otherwise why would it even be mentioned that they promised not to let the deal interrupt the 2019 WC? That's all you need to know. They came out of the negotiations promising that. Why would they need to say that if they were pleased?
 
#67
#67
n_huffhines said:
What do you mean? It's right there in the NYT.

Just because they accepted that deal doesn't mean it's what they wanted. The article suggests otherwise. This is why they continued to push for equal pay. There was no moment where they were like "oh, we're happy with this" and then suddenly became unhappy again.
Click to expand...

Did someone force them to sign the deal with a gun to their head?
 
#68
#68
volfanngatorland said:
Did someone force them to sign the deal with a gun to their head?
Click to expand...

Completely irrelevant. Nobody is saying they were forced to sign the deal. The deal is almost over. They've kept up their end of the bargain. They are still pushing for what they originally wanted. What's the problem?
 
#69
#69
dobre_shunka said:
2 years, sister.

If you don't like the deal, don't sign it. If you can't get the deal you want, walk away.
Click to expand...

So it's all or nothing? You don't agree with taking small steps towards what you ultimately want? Such a weird attitude. Does this attitude apply to your life, or is it just handy when you want to pass judgment on others?
 
#70
#70
n_huffhines said:
Completely irrelevant. Nobody is saying they were forced to sign the deal. The deal is almost over. They've kept up their end of the bargain. They are still pushing for what they originally wanted. What's the problem?
Click to expand...

Very relevant. You say they weren’t happy with the deal, yet they signed it and are now complaining that it isn’t fair?

If it’s not fair, don’t sign the deal. It’s pretty simple.
 
#72
#72
volfanngatorland said:
Very relevant. You say they weren’t happy with the deal, yet they signed it and are now complaining that it isn’t fair?

If it’s not fair, don’t sign the deal. It’s pretty simple.
Click to expand...

...

n_huffhines said:
So it's all or nothing? You don't agree with taking small steps towards what you ultimately want? Such a weird attitude. Does this attitude apply to your life?
Click to expand...

They want to play and they need $. Whether or not the deal is "fair" isn't the only consideration. Every deal you've accepted was one you were happy with? What a charmed life that would be.
 
#73
#73
n_huffhines said:
...



They want to play and they need $. Whether or not the deal is "fair" isn't the only consideration. Every deal you've accepted was one you were happy with? What a charmed life that would be.
Click to expand...

Now you’re starting to understand my point
 
#74
#74
n_huffhines said:
This is not relevant to my point. They were not satisfied with the deal, otherwise why would it even be mentioned that they promised not to let the deal interrupt the 2019 WC? That's all you need to know. They came out of the negotiations promising that. Why would they need to say that if they were pleased?
Click to expand...
Probably for the same reason when any professional league has a contentious cba agreement. "Yay! a deal was signed. Now we're good for another x years".

As for pay I don't know. Everything about USM and USW teams are different. Men aren't employees of US soccer and don't earn a base salary. The USW don't want that pay structure. FIFA pays out more for USM tournaments.

I'm guessing there's much more to the details of why's than "they don't want to pay us because we're women."
 
#75
#75
n_huffhines said:
So it's all or nothing? You don't agree with taking small steps towards what you ultimately want? Such a weird attitude. Does this attitude apply to your life, or is it just handy when you want to pass judgment on others?
Click to expand...
Sorry I'm not a woke social justice warrior like you trying to save adults from decisions they made of their own volition. You are obviously such a much better person.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top