Re: I’m officially pulling against the USA ( link)

Orange Blooded [4596]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 3360

Joined: 8/14/01

Mar 8, 2019, 2:26 PM

This is from a 2016 article (when the first such lawsuit was raised):

But data released last week by the U.S. Soccer Federation show that the top women’s players make nearly as much as the highest-paid men’s players. Since 2008, six national-team men and six women have earned more than $1 million from the Federation. And according to ESPN, 14 of the 25 highest-earning national-team players over the past four years have been women, whose compensation averaged $695,269. That’s 2.2% below the average for men. Women also receive benefits that men don’t, including maternity leave and severance pay if they get cut from the team. Women get paid if they’re sidelined with an injury; men don’t.

Women on the U.S. national soccer teams aren’t paid less than men. They’re paid differently because the collective-bargaining agreements they have negotiated emphasize income- and job-security. Women players earn annual salaries of $72,000; the men get paid by how many games they play. The men’s roster is more fluid, and the head coach can call players to camp for one game.

Nearly 50 men’s players appeared in games for the U.S. national squad last year, but only three played more than 13 games. The women’s team fields about half as many players.

Players on the women’s team receive smaller bonuses than the men: Women are awarded $1,350 for each win, while the men get $5,000 for each game they’re on the national roster and are paid $6,250-$17,625 for each victory, depending on their opponent’s ranking.

Another significant disparity: The U.S. women’s team received $2 million from the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) for winning the World Cup last year, while the men’s team landed $9 million merely for advancing to the round of 16.

----\

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

The WNT set a new collective bargaining agreement in 2017. Again, the women's CBA is focused on what the women wanted OTHER than straight up dollars (like pregnancy benefits and "lifestyle" benefits):

According to SI:

The new CBA includes: A commitment from U.S. Soccer to pay the NWSL salaries for allocated players; a return commitment by the players to compete in the NWSL; a requirement for the improvement of NWSL standards; and the ability of the WNTPA to control group likeness rights for licensing and non-exclusive rights in sponsorship categories where U.S. Soccer does not have a sponsor.

The new CBA also provides: A significant increase in direct compensation and bonus compensation; enhanced “lifestyle” benefits for the players with respect to travel and hotels; per diems that are equal to those of the men’s team; and greater financial support for players who are pregnant and players adopting a child.

On Tuesday’s podcast, Sauerbrunn agreed with Gulati’s characterization of what the women’s team was pursuing in a February Planet Fútbol podcast as “equitable” pay but not “equal” to that of the U.S. men’s team. Sauerbrunn noted that was because the salary structure the women’s players were seeking from U.S. Soccer—including payment for their club play, which the men don’t receive from the federation—was fundamentally different from the men’s structure.

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

I’m officially pulling against the USA ( link)