USWNT sues USSF 2019 version

Discussion in 'USA Women: News and Analysis' started by lil_one, Mar 8, 2019.

  1. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #1 lil_one, Mar 8, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
    We had previous threads about the EEOC filing and the CBA negotiations, but I don't know how far back those are. Plus, we now have a new lawsuit, so new thread. And if history is any indication, this thread will have lots of discussion.

    The USWNT filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court in Los Angeles against USSF for "institutionalized gender discrimination." It basically looks like the next step for the players after they saw no movement on the EEOC complaint (filed three years ago).

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/08/sports/womens-soccer-team-lawsuit-gender-discrimination.html

    Nice timing right before a WWC...
     
    jnielsen, CoachJon and TimB4Last repped this.
  2. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  3. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  4. puttputtfc

    puttputtfc Member+

    Sep 7, 1999
    I have no problem paying the women the same as long as they are willing to give up the guaranteed roster spot. If Lloyd wants the same pay as Rowe she should have the same job security as Rowe.
     
  5. MRAD12

    MRAD12 Member+

    Jun 10, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    I agree with puttputtfc.

    The women want the same pay as men AND a guaranteed contract (which the men do not have).

    UWNT players, agree to get paid per game, per call-up, like the men do and then I may agree with the same pay as men.

    You can't have it both ways.

    There are some USWNT players on the team well past their "use-by" date.
    What? You want job security into their 50's? Give me a break. If you play well on your Club team, you get called up, just like the men, if you don't play well on your Club team, no call-up, no pay.

    Some of these "veterans" get into the USWNT, and you can't get them out with a crow-bar, no matter how bad they have become.

    Get rid of the contract! The men don't have one and neither should the women.
     
    Namdynamo and jack sticker repped this.
  6. jackdoggy

    jackdoggy Member

    May 16, 2014
    Big D
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  7. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    makes sense to me.

    you’ve posted this several times.

    which of the current contracted players (other than Lloyd, who many coaches and posters would say is absolutely valuable going into this wc), are the “Some of these "veterans" get into the USWNT, and you can't get them out with a crow-bar, no matter how bad they have become“ you’re talking about?

    Morgan Brian
    Julie Ertz
    Alyssa Naeher
    Casey Short
    Abby Dahlkemper
    Crystal Dunn
    Sam Mewis
    McCall Zerboni
    Ashlyn Harris
    Alex Morgan
    Adrianna Franch
    Tobin Heath
    Lindsey Horan
    Emily Sonnett
    Allie Long
    Megan Rapinoe
    Carli Lloyd
    Kelley O’Hara
    Christen Press
    Becky Sauerbrunn
    Rose Lavelle
    Mallory Pugh
     
    McSkillz repped this.
  8. MRAD12

    MRAD12 Member+

    Jun 10, 2004
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Well, what comes to mind is Abby Wambach in the past and of course now Lloyd.
    IMO, you could have put a cardboard cutout of Wambach in her last couple years on top of the box and it would have been as effective as the real person.

    I just don't like the contract the USWNT has. It is outdated.

    Folks, I've been a huge supporter of the women's game for many years as you know and I always will be, but some of the politics that I perceive involved in the women's game, especially going up the ladder, just rub me the wrong way.

    I want to see constant rotation of deserving players in the USWNT just like there is in the USMNT.
     
    jack sticker repped this.
  9. TrueCrew

    TrueCrew Member+

    Dec 22, 2003
    Columbus, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It is not only the pay, but tge conditions, turf the USWNT is asked to play on but the men are not, etc.

    Treating this as pay only misses the point.
     
  10. puttputtfc

    puttputtfc Member+

    Sep 7, 1999
    Has the USWNT played on turf since the CBA? I'm asking because I don't know and I'm too lazy to look it up. This part has merit if the conditions have not been upgraded since the last lawsuit.
     
  11. Yoshou

    Yoshou Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2009
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    2017 is the last time, I think. They played on turf in friendlies in New Orleans and BC place and the Tournament of Nations in Seattle. 2018 and 2019 (so far), seem to be all grass.
     
    CMeszt repped this.
  12. luvdagame

    luvdagame Member+

    Jul 6, 2000
    your post said “there are” - which is why i asked about the current....

    and having players on the team who are passed their sell-by date has little to do with the contract. this is just normal straightforward coaching. just look at men’s nts all over the world.

    so do i.

    but i don’t want the good or promising players to leave the game because they’re only getting a sizeable check when called up. weekly woso revenue is a pittance.

    neither ussf nor the sueing players want the contracts to end now, because that will begin the decline of the uswnt.
     
  13. Bob Lamm

    Bob Lamm Member

    Mar 7, 2016
    Solidarity with the players and their lawsuit. It's great to see female athletes fighting for social justice in the sports world. Just as it's great when they fight for social justice outside the sports world, as some of them do.
     
    neems and McSkillz repped this.
  14. y-lee-coyote

    y-lee-coyote Member+

    Dec 4, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    I don't know if there is institutional gender discrimination by the USSF or not, there is definitely institutional incompetence.

    WOSO can't put butts in the seats. Everything in life involves trade-offs. You want all these things just like the men, well the obvious thing is the men do not have contracts. Until they come to the table willing to relinquish that then they are being disingenuous themselves. Legal ploy or not it still reeks.

    It doesn't matter to me as much as it used too I have PTSunilD from his inglorious reign at the helm, which is characterized almost DGAF.
     
    neems repped this.
  15. puttputtfc

    puttputtfc Member+

    Sep 7, 1999
    It has everything to do with the contracts as that's what defines the team's personnel. There is nothing straightforward or comparable as no other team on the planet uses this system of player selection.

    How many good, potential players have walked away because the players know they will be shut out? If memory serves, we've produced some great U-23 teams where no one pursues a pro career. We are at the point where NWSL draftees are choosing opportunities overseas. If Mace is good enough to play in WC 2019, she should not be shut out by contracts signed a year ago. Leaving top players and prospects off the team is what begins the decline.
     
    sitruc, Auriaprottu, Namdynamo and 2 others repped this.
  16. puttputtfc

    puttputtfc Member+

    Sep 7, 1999
    Is this social justice or the perception of social justice being used for personal gain?

    There's no correct answer, it's a personal viewpoint, but it's a fair question to ask.
     
    Namdynamo, MRAD12 and y-lee-coyote repped this.
  17. neems

    neems Member+

    Liverpool FC
    United States
    Apr 14, 2009
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It's the USSF creating another issue for themselves. There's no reason a equal flat rate wouldn't work. The women just have a lot more on the line than the men's team in terms of professional prospects.
     
    jnielsen repped this.
  18. puttputtfc

    puttputtfc Member+

    Sep 7, 1999
    USSF is great at creating their own problems. Those clowns would overthink a trip to the Wendy's drive through.

    If a flat, equal rate is granted what would happen to SheBelieves, Tournament of Nations or Victory tours? These are USSF as opposed to CONCACAF and a way to supplement income.
     
    MRAD12 repped this.
  19. Bob Lamm

    Bob Lamm Member

    Mar 7, 2016
  20. puttputtfc

    puttputtfc Member+

    Sep 7, 1999
  21. neems

    neems Member+

    Liverpool FC
    United States
    Apr 14, 2009
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    They could just combine all sources of revenue into the general fund. Disperse to players (m/f), operations, youth teams, etc..

    I don't understand the need for excessive nuance beyond the fact that the women's game has some serious problems with the private sector and professional opportunities beyond national team play.
     
    jnielsen repped this.
  22. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'd highly recommend everyone commenting actually read the lawsuit, but since I know many of you won't, here's some highlights. My comments are in parentheses after each paragraph. Get ready for a long post. (Also disclaimer: I'm not nor have I ever been a lawyer. I'm just pulling info from the lawsuit doc.)

    --The plaintiffs listed: Morgan, Rapinoe, Sauerbrunn, Lloyd, Brian, Campbell, Colaprico, Dahlkemper, Davidson, Dunn, Ertz, Franch, Harris, Heath, Horan, Lavelle, Long, Mathias, McDonald, Mewis, Naeher, O'Hara, Press, Pugh, Short, Sonnett, Sullivan and Zerboni (noticeably missing from recent training camp: Fox; also addition of Horan who was out injured and Brian who was not called up; as Fox was called in to replace Colaprico, maybe the team meetings happened while Colaprico was still present)

    --There's multiple digs at the MNT, which really doesn't help anything. In fact, one out-of-the-box solution could have been to have joint bargaining power with the MNT for one joint CBA. I don't think that would ever happen, for multiple reasons, but it certainly won't happen after the multiple jabs at the MNT's performance.

    --The lawsuit pulls from years that give evidence of their point (FY 2016 to show net profit of the team) while ignoring years that don't.

    --In the argument that the WNT is paid unequally, some of the numbers:
    "A comparison of the WNT and MNT pay shows that if each team played 20 friendlies in a year and each team won all twenty friendlies, female WNT players would earn a maximum of $99,000 or $4,950 per game, while similarly situated male MNT players would earn an average of $263,320 or $13,166 per game against the various levels of competition they would face. A 20-game winning top tier WNT player would earn only 38% of the compensation of a similarly situated MNT player....From March 19, 2013 through December 31, 2016, WNT players earned only $15,000 total for being asked to try out for the World Cup team and for making the team roster. MNT players, on the other hand, earned $55,000 each for making their team’s roster in 2014 and could have earned $68,750 each for making their team’s roster in 2018." (I would like to see the above numbers under the current CBA personally, but these numbers are significant. Does it also take the players' NWSL salary paid by USSF into account? I'd guess not, nor do I think should it.)

    --One of their arguments for unequal pay though is based on FIFA bonuses though: "The pay for advancement through the rounds of the World Cup was so skewed that, in 2014, the USSF provided the MNT with performance bonuses totaling $5,375,000 for losing in the Round of 16, while, in 2015, the USSF provided the WNT with only $1,725,000 for winning the entire tournament. The WNT earned more than three times less than the MNT while performing demonstrably better."

    --More significantly, apparently USSF rejected the WNT players' request for equal pay in the 2017 CBA negotiations. They also rejected a revenue-sharing model: "The WNTPA even proposed a revenue-sharing model that would test the USSF’s 'market realities' theory. Under this model, player compensation would increase in years in which the USSF derived more revenue from WNT activities and player compensation would be less if revenue from those activities decreased. This showed the players’ willingness to share in the risk and reward of the economic success of the WNT. The USSF categorically rejected this model as well." (I do wonder what exactly the request for equal pay on the WNT's part in 2017 was. I'd say equal pay if they want equal pay structure.)

    --They also argue unequal treatment, on the basis of playing on turf: "For example, from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2017, the WNT played 62 domestic matches, 13 (21%) of which were played on artificial surfaces. During that same period of time, the MNT played 49 domestic matches, only 1 (2%) of which was played on an artificial surface....During this same time period, the USSF arranged for natural grass to be installed temporarily over artificial surfaces for 8 MNT domestic matches, including 3 venues where the USSF did not temporarily install natural grass when the WNT played in those same venues. The USSF provided a temporary natural grass overlay for the WNT only once during this same time period." (I heard the turf issue though was fixed by the new CBA? I could be wrong.)

    --They also argue unequal treatment on the basis of charter vs commercial flights: "The USSF provides the MNT with the benefit of charter flights more frequently than it does for the WNT. In 2017, for example, the USSF chartered flights for the MNT on at least seventeen occasions, while failing to do so even once for the WNT." (This may be an unfair comparison, seeing as the MNT was in WCQ at the time...I'd like to see a different year in the cycle compared.)

    --The also argue that the games are not equally promoted: "...Among other things, the USSF has allocated less resources promoting WNT games than it has allocated promoting MNT games; has not announced WNT games with sufficient notice to allow for maximum attendance; and has not used all available means to promote WNT games in a manner at least equal to MNT games....In December 2017, the former President of Soccer United Marketing – the for-profit marketing company the USSF has used for many years to market the national teams and other soccer entities – acknowledged that the WNT has been under-marketed. She further acknowledged that the USSF has “taken the WNT for granted” and agreed that there was a need for the USSF to invest equally in the WNT and MNT....Such disparate treatment in the promotion of the WNT has a direct and negative effect not only on revenue generated by the WNT but compensation in the form of ticket share revenue – an amount paid by the USSF to each national team for each ticket sold to their USSF-promoted home friendlies. ...The USSF further continues to discriminate against Plaintiffs and similarly situated WNT players by having set ticket prices to the WNT games at a lower price than for MNT games. The USSF’s unilateral decision to set such lower ticket prices, coupled with its decision to provide substantially less marketing and promotion support to the WNT, results in USSF-manufactured revenue depression for the WNT, which is then used as pretext for lower compensation for Plaintiffs." (This I'd wholeheartedly agree with; the WNT's games do not get the same promotion as the men's. I'd want the MNT ticket prices to come down to the women's though, instead of the WNT's games going up.)

    --The lawsuit is for violations of the Equal Pay Act and the Civil Rights Act.

    --The women seek back pay, general and special damages for lost compensation and benefits, exemplary and punitive damages to deter future discriminatory conduct, an adjustment of wages and benefits, costs incurred such as attorneys' fees, etc.
     
    sitruc, westcoast ape, Gilmoy and 4 others repped this.
  23. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    In a bit of a surprise (to me, considering the jabs I mentioned above towards the men's team), the MNT Player's Association has issued a statement supporting the WNT's efforts (and also highlighting that they are currently in CBA negotiations):

     
    jnielsen, Bob Lamm and blissett repped this.
  24. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    CoachJon repped this.
  25. neems

    neems Member+

    Liverpool FC
    United States
    Apr 14, 2009
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I read the file. The most interesting part I found was that USSF rejected a couple attempts at an equal pay model. I'd like to hear more about those discussions.
     

Share This Page