goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: MakeItRain on March 31, 2016, 09:49:44 AM
-
http://espn.go.com/espnw/sports/article/15102506/women-national-team-files-wage-discrimination-action-vs-us-soccer-federation
I pretty much categorically disagree with the notion that the WNT should receive equal pay as the MNT. Its complete bullshit that they aren't paid for every game though.
-
http://espn.go.com/espnw/sports/article/15102506/women-national-team-files-wage-discrimination-action-vs-us-soccer-federation
I pretty much categorically disagree with the notion that the WNT should receive equal pay as the MNT. Its complete bullshit that they aren't paid for every game though.
Why do you disagree?
-
The filing, citing figures from the USSF's 2015 financial report, says that despite the women's team generating nearly $20 million more revenue last year than the U.S. men's team, the women are paid almost four times less.
That is pretty stunning, but they definitely got a World Cup bump.
-
http://espn.go.com/espnw/sports/article/15102506/women-national-team-files-wage-discrimination-action-vs-us-soccer-federation
I pretty much categorically disagree with the notion that the WNT should receive equal pay as the MNT. Its complete bullshit that they aren't paid for every game though.
Why do you disagree?
I don't accept that $20 million figure. If its correct then USSF needs to pay them their due but its worth noting that if that dollar figure is correct its an extreme exception based on there being a world cup played in Canada that we won and the fact that there was a new media rights deal for that world cup. There should just be a scale in place that allows the player pool for both genders to get a percentage of the earned money by the federation. But under this model it's likely to result in overall lower salaries for the women in the long run. 2015 was either the first or second most lucrative year for USSF women's soccer revenue o.a.t. If we were going to go to some wage scale based on revenue brought in it would be beneficial in the short term only.
-
I would be satisfied if the pay was determined as a proportion of revenue for both teams. If that is what the women are asking for it would be ridiculous not to give it to them on the spot.
-
I would be satisfied if the pay was determined as a proportion of revenue for both teams. If that is what the women are asking for it would be ridiculous not to give it to them on the spot.
I don't think they really want that though. They want it for 2015, they definitely wouldn't want that for 2014. I would also wonder if the USSF did that then they would leave themselves liable for an equal opportunity lawsuit in non-world cup years.
-
That's probably right. Can't blame them for trying though. Almost like asking your boss for a raise after a really good year. Or maybe like suing your boss for a raise.. Whatever.
-
It seems as if USSF believes they sued for a raise before asking for one.
-
They've been rattling this saber for a long time, as you know MiR. I think it's pretty dishonest to only cite one year (all I've seen in this new cycle of stories). But I see from their position they feel they are getting a raw deal on many fronts, turf, to travel, to accommodations.
-
I've always been a little suspect of that 0.70 on the dollar figure that get's thrown around like it's 100% cement truth.
-
I've always been a little suspect of that 0.70 on the dollar figure that get's thrown around like it's 100% cement truth.
Like everything political, stats are used and abused. I tend to agree with it when you get more macro in your examination and not micro Job X men/women = these pays. I do agree there are fair and unfair societal forces pushing women to less lucrative careers and even forces that change the perception of women in the work place.
-
I've always been a little suspect of that 0.70 on the dollar figure that get's thrown around like it's 100% cement truth.
Like everything political, stats are used and abused. I tend to agree with it when you get more macro in your examination and not micro Job X men/women = these pays. I do agree there are fair and unfair societal forces pushing women to less lucrative careers and even forces that change the perception of women in the work place.
Maybe so, but that's a fundamentally different problem than "equal pay for equal work."
-
http://espn.go.com/espnw/sports/article/15102506/women-national-team-files-wage-discrimination-action-vs-us-soccer-federation
I pretty much categorically disagree with the notion that the WNT should receive equal pay as the MNT. Its complete bullshit that they aren't paid for every game though.
Why do you disagree?
I don't accept that $20 million figure. If its correct then USSF needs to pay them their due but its worth noting that if that dollar figure is correct its an extreme exception based on there being a world cup played in Canada that we won and the fact that there was a new media rights deal for that world cup. There should just be a scale in place that allows the player pool for both genders to get a percentage of the earned money by the federation. But under this model it's likely to result in overall lower salaries for the women in the long run. 2015 was either the first or second most lucrative year for USSF women's soccer revenue o.a.t. If we were going to go to some wage scale based on revenue brought in it would be beneficial in the short term only.
Makes sense. This, to me, seems similar to CBAs in any sport. Wouldn't it make sense for an agreement that a percentage of revenue goes to the athletes? I get that it would create big disparities during non-world cup years but it seems like an extension of what is used in the industry.
-
As others have pointed out, instead of negotiating for more money, they sue. And in their lawsuit, they apparently say they are paid 4 times less than the men. (I don't know how this is even possible since 1 times less would be $0.)
-
They've been rattling this saber for a long time, as you know MiR. I think it's pretty dishonest to only cite one year (all I've seen in this new cycle of stories). But I see from their position they feel they are getting a raw deal on many fronts, turf, to travel, to accommodations.
The one year is all you're seeing because that's the basis of the lawsuit. I'm guessing they will settle for mine money based on the 2015 world cup and victory tour, which they should get, but there is no way this results in equal pay. Their other issues are with FIFA and not the USSF.
-
They don't have to play, JFC
-
What a ridiculous argument.
-
They don't have to play, JFC
Minorities don't have to work at companies that discriminate against them either, JFC
-
Have you guys seen WNBA contracts? OMG! :lol:
-
I think this is the perfect case to set the precedent for the farse that is "equal pay for equal work". I'm glad someone finally decided to move this misnomer to judgment.
-
I think this is the perfect case to set the precedent for the farse that is "equal pay for equal work". I'm glad someone finally decided to move this misnomer to judgment.
I'm certainly not advocating this be used as a litmus test for the entire debate.
-
I think this is the perfect case to set the precedent for the farse that is "equal pay for equal work". I'm glad someone finally decided to move this misnomer to judgment.
I'm certainly not advocating this be used as a litmus test for the entire debate.
I think it would be great. It would force the superminority of leftists debating about it to take 5 seconds to think it through logically (if they are even physically able to), which should be enough to move on to something actually worth talking about.
-
I assume the disparity is driven by men's leagues outside of the world cup.
I'm not sue I understand the question. Leagues around the world have little to nothing to do with how the national soccer federation pays their players
-
I assume the disparity is driven by men's leagues outside of the world cup.
I'm not sue I understand the question. Leagues around the world have little to nothing to do with how the national soccer federation pays their players
Due to competition for their time. I guess it also assumes sport leagues that employ athletes are a good way to find the best players. In no way am I saying the current level of compensation is adaquate.
Other assumption was that USA mens team actually has stud contracts in whatever league they play in. Not a big soccer fan.
I still don't think I understand what you're asking. What the men's and women's players make for salaries on their clubs are totally and completely separate from their national team compensation. National team play is also separate from league play. Most leagues take a break during times when the national team plays.
-
I think what he is saying that expectations are different for pay depending on what their regular team salary is. If a player is getting 1 mil with his club, $50k may not be worth it for them to spend time with the national team. To a player getting $50k with their club, $50k is pretty good compensation to play with the national team.
Basically a millionaire isn't going to take a second job unless it's worthwhile money-wise.
-
I think what he is saying that expectations are different for pay depending on what their regular team salary is. If a player is getting 1 mil with his club, $50k may not be worth it for them to spend time with the national team. To a player getting $50k with their club, $50k is pretty good compensation to play with the national team.
Basically a millionaire isn't going to take a second job unless it's worthwhile money-wise.
Yes this, their market rate would be influenced by their club salary as would the WNT.
Again not saying that the current WNT salary reflects the interest and money they generate for that specific team. For all I know the contract has been neglected for many years to the player's detriment while interest rose.
Got it, thanks. In some ways that makes sense but the USSF does not pay that way. A rookie in MLS gets essentially the same as the highest paid club player who currently is Michael Bradley. There is a base pay that everyone of each gender gets and then incentives added onto the base pay. The women start with a much lower base. Where USSF has erred is that they do stupid stuff like not giving equal per diem. In some ways I get not paying the same for performance bonuses because I'm sure that has something to do with the amount of money the federation gets from FIFA.
I am going to change my stance on this if this story is true:
http://www.businessinsider.com/men-women-us-soccer-player-salaries-2016-4 mg
I don't know how the women can possibly make more than the men this year with the men hosting Copa Centenario. If they in fact are making good money for USSF in the off cycle years they should be paid accordingly.