Done deal: US Soccer and USWNT sign new CBA

Discussion in 'USA Women: News and Analysis' started by BlueCrimson, Apr 5, 2017.

  1. BlueCrimson

    BlueCrimson Member+

    North Carolina Courage
    United States
    Nov 21, 2012
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Club:
    Sydney FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  2. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It would be great to know more details (although I doubt it will happen unless it comes out in the EEOC case), but I am especially excited about this part (from NYT article): "[T]he new agreement includes...requirements that the federation improve standards in the league in everything from stadiums to facilities to — through sizable increases in camp and roster bonuses for players not under contract with U.S. Soccer — money that can go to players in the league’s rank and file who exist on the periphery of the more established national team pool."

    Also noticed a new benefit from the SI article: there will be support/benefits for not only players who become pregnant but also those who choose to adopt.
     
  3. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Notes from the FoxSports commentary in the US-Russia game:
    --The Europe based players flew business class back for this friendly. Under the old MOU, airline tickets for friendlies were premium economy.
    --The commentators mentioned that the base salary (combined for WNT and NWSL play) for Tier 1 players MAY be around $165,000. If true, that seems to be an increase of $37,000 from the old CBA ($72,000 WNT Tier 1+ $56,000 2016 NWSL pay).
     
    chungachanga repped this.
  4. sitruc

    sitruc Member+

    Jul 25, 2006
    Virginia
    Although the language to keep up with the men's CBA was not in the CBA, hadn't USSF already agreed to this? This was just the first time it came up since the players were US based before.
     
  5. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I remember reading something last year maybe about an agreement for the same deal as the men's CBA as far as travel goes, but I couldn't remember exactly what or when. As far as the legal contract goes and the actual CBA/MOU docs that I have, its a change though.
     
    sitruc repped this.
  6. puttputtfc

    puttputtfc Member+

    Sep 7, 1999
    Not a fan if we still have contracts. We need to expand not secure our player pool.
     
  7. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Grant Wahl has a couple of other details regarding the new CBA:

    -Players now have control over group likeness rights for licensing.
    -The minimum number of contract players has been reduced from 24 to 22, and it will continue to decrease.
     
    chungachanga, DoyleG and sitruc repped this.
  8. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    For my own benefit and other's future reference, I'd like to keep a running list of CBA details as they get reported. So I'm catching up:

    A NYT article, that I mentioned before but was not linked in this forum, had some behind-the-scenes info on how the players negotiated (shared Google docs, practicing their speeches, etc.). And more importantly, it reports a detail that I'd overlooked before: apparently USSF has agreed to pay 2 years' worth of unequal per diems.

    Also according to Andrew Das, no prohibitions in CBA on turf:


    Also the reduced minimum on contract players suggested that it will be easier for more call-ups, but there might be other CBA terms making it easier as well:

    Tied to that, "floater" pay is also increasing (from Beau Dure).

    Beau Dure has also listed what he's learned, confirming some of the above and including:
    -WNT players commit to playing in the NWSL, to some extent. (There's numbers involved that we don't know...minimum numbers of players who commit to playing in the NWSL each season, so everyone can't head overseas.)
    -Victory Tours MAY be a thing of the past with new terms on bonuses.
     
    chungachanga, TimB4Last and BostonRed repped this.
  9. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Not really seeing how reducing the minimum number of contracts helps NWSL players get on the WNT gravy train.

    1. Lowering the minimum contracts does open spots for floaters from NWSL but they could also be filled with non paid HS/cpllege players which seems to be an Ellis trend of late.

    2. I see no correlation between giving ur contract player more money to play and then not using them in favor of floaters who u have to pay additional money to. If anything bigger contracts seems to leave less money for floaters.

    3. As there r built in requirements to upgrade floaters to full contracts after so many service days r met, the fact that the USSF favors fewer contracts makes me wonder if it will be harder for floaters to earn contracts. Ironically, it likely also means that floaters earning contracts will replace current contract players not add to the current total of players actually earning a decent living off soccer.
     
  10. Airox

    Airox Member

    Mar 14, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think the core idea behind shrinking the minimum number of contracts is to eventually get it to 0. Imagine every few years it shrinks a few. Now it's 22, but next CBA it falls to 19. Then a couple years later 16 then 12. Then at some point it would disappear altogether.

    It seems like a plan to eventually get to the same pay structure as the men, but not all at once.
     
    BostonRed repped this.
  11. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Sauerbrunn said as much in an interview with Grant Wahl, not in particular about the CBA terms but that they want to move slowly to a structure like the men's.
     
  12. kernel_thai

    kernel_thai Member+

    Oct 24, 2012
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    And there may be components we just don't know about yet like changes to the win bonus system but on the surface if ur reducing contracts on one side but not changing the the win bonus situation to compensate then ur not slowly moving towards the men's system ur just contracting to create money for salary increases.
     
  13. Airox

    Airox Member

    Mar 14, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Yeah, the devil is in the details.
     
  14. msilverstein47

    msilverstein47 Member+

    Jan 11, 1999
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  15. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    actually, reality....

    "The lack of a specific ban on turf in the collective bargaining agreement was by design; it would have tied U.S. Soccer’s hands in venue selection, thwarting what it calls its “mission” to send the team to as many markets as possible. But the players didn’t want one either, since it would have ruled out established markets like Portland, Ore., and Seattle, for example, and emerging ones like Cincinnati."
     
  16. Airox

    Airox Member

    Mar 14, 2016
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Both are reality. Also reality is that communication and teamwork between the two is terrible. They should have common goals. Apparently not.

    From the players view, I don't think the issue is playing on turf. It is the high frequency of playing on turf.
     
  17. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    have common goals?

    great ideal. i like it. i'm sure they do. but i'm not surprised that each side has different ideas about how to get there. labor and management almost always knock heads. lets just hope it doesn't get too antagonistic.
     

Share This Page