USWNT CBA

Discussion in 'USA Women: News and Analysis' started by Hexa, Dec 13, 2021.

  1. Hexa

    Hexa Member+

    May 21, 2010
    Club:
    Vasco da Gama Rio Janeiro
    #26 Hexa, May 18, 2022
    Last edited: May 18, 2022
    USWNT gave up guaranteed salaries and will have same pay-to-play structure as the USMNT.

    Some regional competition with no women equivalente prize money (C'CAF NL, eventual Copa America) won't the shared.

    https://www.espn.com/soccer/united-...-equal-split-of-world-cup-bonuses-in-new-cbas
     
  2. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    Hexa repped this.
  3. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Honestly I'm still a bit surprised that the two player unions were successful at coming together on this.

    This also will finalize the lawsuit settlement.

    Anyway, I like to have the details (as much as we can find all in one thread for future reference):

    -Goes into effect on June 1
    -Effective until Dec 31, 2028 (5 year CBA)
    -Teams will receive 90% of 2022 and 2023 WC prize money and 80% of 2026 and 2027 WC prize money...pooled and split evenly between the two national teams
    -Gold Cup and W Gold Cup prize money pooled equally and then split so that each team receives 35% of the total pool
    -For competitions without an equivalent (e.g. Copa America, SheBelieves), participating team receives 70% of the prize money
    -Equal pay per day in camp; equal per diems (had already been made equal)
    -Equal split of commercial revenue sharing (from sponsors and broadcasts): revenue share kicks in once USSF crosses the $55 million income threshold. For $55-$75 million in an individual year, each team receives 10 percent. For more than $75 million, each team gets 15 percent of the total.
    -From 2023 to 2026, for USSF-controlled games, teams will receive $5.06 from every ticket sold; for 2027 and 2028, $5.75 for each ticket. For sold out games, teams get a bonus of 10% of the average ticket cost.
    -Identical pay for friendlies (no guaranteed salaries): $8000 appearance fee plus $10,000 bonus for a win and $3,000 for a draw for top 25 ranked team. For lower-ranked opponents, still an $8000 appearance fee and then a bonus of $5,000 for a win and $2,000 for a draw. Previously, the women's team only received top-tier bonuses for a top 4 ranked team or Canada
    -WC qualifying tournament pay: $10,000 appearance fee plus $14,000 for a win $4,000 for a draw
    -Other official competitions: $10,000 appearance fee plus $12,000 for a win and $4,000 for a draw
    -WC matches (details here are in conflict in different articles so I'd like to see what the CBA actually says): $10,000 appearance fee and then pooling and splitting the prize money
    -Men reportedly receiving $2.5 million for WC qualification, that is not shared with women's team (but this is essentially retroactive pay, for not having a CBA for 3 years)
    -Women's CBA still includes benefits for some players ("for additional work") for injury protection, child care, and 6 months parental leave.
    -Additionally, the men's team will now receive the benefit of child care during camps and matches
    -Other benefit: USSF is setting up a 401k plan for both teams (USSF matches up to 5% of players' compensation)
    -Equal number of players named to game-day rosters (increases from 18 to 23 for the WNT so more players can get the game-day pay-out)
    -Minimum and equal standards for venues and field surfaces, accommodations and travel, national-team staffing, and safe work environments

    Details from above ESPN article, the Athletic article and the Equalizer
     
    Bob Lamm, JanBalk, Noledavey and 2 others repped this.
  4. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    There is going to be a pay out almost immediately for the women's team at this summer's qualifying. Under the old CBA, a WNT player not under contract would have made $3,750 base pay for five games, plus $3,000/game win bonus, plus a $37,500 qualification bonus. That totals to $71,250.

    Now that same player will get an appearance fee of $10,000 per game, plus $14,000 per win. If the team wins out across the 5 games, that's $120,000 in pay for the tournament.

    An Equalizer article estimates that a WNT player who makes every roster will make about $450,000 in a non-WC year (could double in a WC year, depending on results). Additionally, in the Equalizer article, sources say that all WNT players are making at least $100,00/yr for their NWSL club (now paid by the NWSL using allocation money).
     
    McSkillz, ytrs, Bob Lamm and 2 others repped this.
  5. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    One more thing: This was possible not only because the men recognized that (in their words) this is what drives the game forward for both teams and were willing to accept possibly less prize money for their WC performance but also because the NWSL is stable enough that the women no longer need the guaranteed salaries from the WNT. That may seem obvious, but it is still historic for woso.

    -Also Zimmerman and Purce are the two quoted in almost every article about this. They were apparently the ones always at the negotiating table (along with others), and I think that's noteworthy.
     
    McSkillz, ytrs, Bob Lamm and 2 others repped this.
  6. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Another detail:
    -Men's PA now has control over its name, image, and likeness rights. Women's team gained this a few years ago (under the last CBA?).
     
  7. Hexa

    Hexa Member+

    May 21, 2010
    Club:
    Vasco da Gama Rio Janeiro
    It will represent a higher FIFA prize money for USWNT players in the short term.

    2022 WC is paying U$ 2.5 mm as preparation fees and a cool 8 mm for every team. USWNT will get half of 90% of 8mm guaranteed. If USMNT survives the group stage they will add 12mm to the pot. So half of 90% of 20mm (U$ 9 million dollars).

    But with the WWC money prize increasing and competitiveness of USWNT it isn't set in stone that USMNT will be able to consistently generate higher FIFA prize money.

    We can see 2023 WWC winner taking a total of U$14.5 million dollars (doubling the total prize money from France).
     
    McSkillz, JanBalk and jackdoggy repped this.
  8. Unimane

    Unimane Member+

    Jul 28, 2009
    Nashville
    Club:
    Borussia Dortmund
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    There's also a few very good reasons that list would contain a lot of American women on them which couldn't possibly be applied to the men's game for a similar list, none of which involve the women's team doing a better job developing in this country than has the men's team. This whole scenario is one of an apples and oranges comparison trying to find some equal ground by an organization which controls both the apple orchard and orange trees.

    Ultimately, I have no idea how one would determine "fair" or "equal" in this endeavor. Both teams operate in completely different worlds. I hope this resolves something of the controversy and we hear nothing of it for a good while.
     
  9. Hexa

    Hexa Member+

    May 21, 2010
    Club:
    Vasco da Gama Rio Janeiro
    I am not sure what you mean by that.

    One team is very successful in the world stage while the other struggled to qualify for WCs. USWNT won 4 out of 8 WWCs, was runner up once and got 3 third place. So, won 50% of all WWCs, semi-finalist 62.5% and reached the quarter finals on all WWCs (100%). No other team (Brazil, Germany etc) have the same stats.

    These statistics are comparable across gender and showcase how dominant USWNT is on WoSo. Germany is the second most accomplished team with 2 wins, 1 second and 2 fourth place finish (quarter finalist 5/8 62.5%).
     
  10. Hexa

    Hexa Member+

    May 21, 2010
    Club:
    Vasco da Gama Rio Janeiro
    I agree, but I think labor laws and public opinion doesn't see the situation as "Both teams operate in completely different worlds.".

    IMHO, both teams got a very generous CBA. The question is if this was at the expense of USSF other investments.

    IMHO, in relative short time (after 3 more WWCs ~ 12 years) WWCs prize money will be significantly higher which would make the current deal financially bad for USWNT. The question is if the call for equal pay are valid in a situation where USWNT earns more than USMNT.
     
  11. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    Of course, it was. USSF might be the only FA in the world to be paying this amount of money to the national team players. Budget cuts in its broader mission are almost a certainty. It might be good if USSF could divest the National Teams into a separate entity from a financial perspective so that the grassroots development programs (coach, referee, outreach, Paralympics, etc.) can have budgets that don't change with the whims of the labor market or are subject to the successes and failures of its national teams.
     
    JanBalk and Hexa repped this.
  12. Hexa

    Hexa Member+

    May 21, 2010
    Club:
    Vasco da Gama Rio Janeiro
    Well, I don't know. USSF seems very generous with FIFA prize money, but again these are performance bonus which should be heavily allocated to players. I imagine future CBA can decrease the percentage paid (FIFA raises the prize money).

    I imagine the federation is seeing a lot of potential in commercial revenue:

    "-Equal split of commercial revenue sharing (from sponsors and broadcasts): revenue share kicks in once USSF crosses the $55 million income threshold. For $55-$75 million in an individual year, each team receives 10 percent. For more than $75 million, each team gets 15 percent of the total." lil_one

    So I guess 55 mm is a threshold were USSF can meet its obligations and investments.
     
  13. Unimane

    Unimane Member+

    Jul 28, 2009
    Nashville
    Club:
    Borussia Dortmund
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The point was the women's stage is a much narrower talent pool, which would allow one country the opportunity to dominate the top players list. Plus, the US was so far advanced in pushing women's sports to the forefront, it gave them a solid advantage over all but a small number of countries. That's a good thing, of course, but it's also something not possible in the men's game, for any country. The talent and competition is too broad and no country could reasonably claim half the top players in the world in such an environment. The competition is too fierce.

    And, the apples and oranges part is pretty well exemplified by the idea of qualifying. The US men's team goes through a months long process, playing fully professional teams in hostile environments for half of them. The women's team plays a two week tournament in which many of the teams are borderline, if not mostly, amateur and usually in their own country. In fact, the last time the women had to qualify in a CONCACAF qualifying tournament outside the US, they didn't. It took the play in game.

    There's innumerable examples such as this. I would even state the ability of the men to reach the top 15 from where they were in the 70s and 80s in that environment shows a similar level of successful development to women's status from their beginnings in the 70s and 80s. But, quantifying that statement would be very difficult. So, again, I don't know how one can reasonably compare the men's and women's teams, other than in superficial terms. Maybe revenue, I suppose. Otherwise, they operate in two very different worlds. So, I hope this deal means the end of the hand wringing and political grandstanding of people in Congress and such. We can even breath easier with the World Cup '26 playing here.
     
  14. Unimane

    Unimane Member+

    Jul 28, 2009
    Nashville
    Club:
    Borussia Dortmund
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But, they don't really earn more. The USWNT benefitted from a unique period in which the men, uncharacteristically, failed to qualify for the World Cup and saw an opportunity to gain leverage. It even hurt the women, because, in court, the judge was able to note this is his ruling against the women's team. I would bet the house the men were able to bring in more dollars during qualifying than, say, the She Believes tournament, especially the way the USSF price gouges.

    I do agree with the idea of "at the expense of USSF other expenses", particularly youth programs. It's also a reason why I wasn't too enamored with the "equal pay" fight. The women wanted more money, which I'm all for labor doing so, especially athletes. But, they framed it as some great social cause, trying to shame the USSF into paying them more. I wouldn't have even minded this, either, until they started demanding the USSF pay them the money FIFA had, which would've cut into those programs most definitely.

    There will be some interesting questions heading forward which might disrupt this deal. How much will the FIFA women's tournament actually pay in comparison with the men, in the future? If the women's game gets more parity, how does this affect the USWNT when they are competing on a level more comparable with the men's game? With the rise of talent among the men, are they going to be a more dangerous threat to advance deeper and make more money or is this a Golden Generation deal?

    Ultimately, I can't imagine a near future in which the women out earn the men again, unless the men have a dip in talent as they did and, inexplicably, fail to qualify in 2030 or 2034.

    .....Or, they decide to keep Berhalter as lifetime coach.
     
  15. Hexa

    Hexa Member+

    May 21, 2010
    Club:
    Vasco da Gama Rio Janeiro
    You do realize that you can compare the first 8 WCs to the first 8 WWCs, right? All your arguments are true for the earlier WCs. There was a much narrow talent pool - It was mainly an European and SA affair. It did allow for one country to dominate top talent pool. Few countries embraced the sports from the beginning which gave them (Brazil, Argentina, Italy, Germany) a solid advantage that persist to this day.

    The first 8 WCs 1930 to 1966 were played by 16 teams at most. Brazil won 2, 1 second place, 1 third place. (50% semi-finals). I compare these stats to USWNT.

    So, do you dismiss early WC achievements when the sports had a much narrow talent or true global reach? The 2 WCs from Brazil, Italy and Uruguay doesn't count?

    It is not USWNT fault that US had a system in place that allowed them to became as dominant as they did. It is not Brazil, Argentina, Germany, Italy fault to have gotten into the sport early which allowed them to develop into world class teams.
     
    McSkillz repped this.
  16. Unimane

    Unimane Member+

    Jul 28, 2009
    Nashville
    Club:
    Borussia Dortmund
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The Cup for the men's game wasn't in conjunction with the men starting playing the game on a wide level, whereas in the women's game it has been. Hell, the Copa America had been playing for about 15 years prior to the World Cup and men had been in pro leagues since the 1800s in Europe and elsewhere.

    They also aren't comparable situations in terms of the women having Title IX in place to develop the game far before nearly every country. No, it's not the women's fault for having done this, for sure, but it was my point to note the development of female athletes here was far more advanced than anywhere else in the world. This is much different than in the men's game, in which a lot of countries had men playing soccer for many years. It's also not comparable in that, 30 years later, the women's game still lacks necessary funding, support, and interest in a large number of countries, something which was not the case in the men's game, certainly not 30 years into their history with the Cup.

    Like I said, this isn't the fault of the USWNT. They don't anyone in the game anything and their progress is from their own efforts and accomplishments. The world still has a lot of places where women's advancement is woefully behind and repressed. But, the USWNT is operating in a world which would allow the possibility of them to dominate the best women's list (Which is debatable, too) and would never have happened in the men's game. It probably won't be able to happen in the women's game, too, fairly soon, if not now.
     
    Auriaprottu repped this.
  17. Yoshou

    Yoshou Fan of the CCL Champ

    May 12, 2009
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Is that part of the agreement? On its face, agreeing to a CBA does not resolve the lawsuit as the women are looking for compensation for previous work.
     
  18. lil_one

    lil_one Member+

    Nov 26, 2013
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That was the agreement of the tentative settlement that resolved the lawsuit. The settlement that was announced in Feb/Mar (of $22 million in back pay) was contingent only on a new CBA with equal pay being finalized. It needs final court approval now, but I assume that's a rubber stamp.

    EDIT to add: thread on the tentative settlement of the lawsuit starting on page 56 of this thread
     
    McSkillz, Hexa, ytrs and 3 others repped this.
  19. ThreeApples

    ThreeApples Member+

    Jul 28, 1999
    Smurf Village
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #46 ThreeApples, May 19, 2022
    Last edited: May 19, 2022
    It seems likely that a regular starter for the WNT will get more income from this CBA than an MNT player, assuming equivalent playing time. World Cup roster players are going to get identical bonuses, so differences are going to arise elsewhere. Just looking at the friendly pay scale, a player gets $18K for a win against a top 25 opponent and $13K for a win against anyone else. With the WNT winning almost every friendly, they're going to rack up more $$$ there on average. If the US doesn't host 2027, the WNT gets higher appearance fees for qualifying matches, while the MNT gets no qualifying matches for 2026.

    The place where the men could generate more pay for themselves would be from official tournaments with no women's equivalent. The only certain one is Nations League. There are rumblings about another joint CONMEBOL/CONCACAF Copa America before 2026, so that could get a good bonus for the players on the roster.

    There are other things like ticket revenue sharing, but that's not easy to predict.

    But whatever, they both generate revenue, this is good.
     
    Bob Lamm and McSkillz repped this.
  20. BostonRed

    BostonRed Member+

    Oct 9, 2011
    Somerville, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It's quite amazing that the deal got done. One reporter said that Cone didn't think the USMNT would give in on the WC bonuses. Considering some of the WNT players made the men the enemy and they didn't really make any big gains compared to what they gave up, you could understand some resistant on the part of the USMNT.

    I do think there was some value to making the issue go away so that the fed can generate more in sponsorships, etc.
     
    Bob Lamm repped this.
  21. McSkillz

    McSkillz Member+

    ANGEL CITY FC, UCLA BRUINS
    United States
    Nov 22, 2014
    Los Angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This is a good thing. What this does whether people are okay with the men splitting their World Cup prize money with the women or not is it now creates a united platform for US Soccer players and begins a new and exciting chapter which we are all want both the USMNT and USWNT to succeed and go deep into their respective tournaments.

    Yes both men's soccer and women's soccer are in completely different stages and makes for different games entirely due to men just biologically being physically better at everything. But it being a different game doesn't necessarily mean one is better than the other either as much as a lot of guys want to argue that point across social media when criticizing the USWNT. I think a lot of it is embedded sexism that men's sports will always be better because men are designed to be faster, stronger and that women aren't supposed to be athletes because they are designed to have children and are on average smaller with less muscle mass than males. For many decades, women were actually banned from playing soccer or sports in general from many countries because powerful men decided that a woman's uterus would fall out or they would be unable to have children. Anyway I digress on the absurdity of that history but I want the naysayers to understand what it means for women when these historical contracts finally take place.

    There are people like myself(as a female) who like to watch both men's and women's soccer. After all, they are not mutually exclusive. I prefer women's soccer because my dad strangely enough took to women's soccer as he saw men were more likely to flop and complain about everything during the few games he tried to sit through. Obviously men's soccer is faster and more technical so that's entertaining and incredibly fun to watch the highest level one can see of the sport. And yes, its true more people watch men's soccer because it's been a thing for 100s of years and there's a long generational loyalty to the game much like baseball and gridiron football to Americans, not to mention long cultural connection from a lot of countries like Brazil and Argentina where it's the most important thing ever for families to bond over.

    By framing it that way, women's soccer was just born 5 minutes ago. Americans had a head start because in the 1970s, Title IX was passed and allowed significant progression for all female athletes even if naysayers were focusing that poor men's sports weren't getting any money now and not understanding the overall picture or even understanding the value of women's sports.

    All in all, women's soccer culture has a long time to get anywhere close to the men but I'm hopeful that these changes that are going to take place with the USWNT will just be the beginning to further accelerate women's sports not just with the US but also put the pressure on other countries to do amazing things for their women's teams. Like how about paying women as professionals in their own respective leagues for one? The money these countries earn from the men should be enough to nurture women's soccer as well, but it's getting over this sexism hump. I think it will happen certainly in my lifetime, I'm confident it will.

    I'm confident there will be a day where we don't see 20-0 anymore in women's soccer.
     
    Hexa, Bob Lamm and cpthomas repped this.
  22. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    And that is when the women will flop and dive just as well as the men do... lol.
     
  23. McSkillz

    McSkillz Member+

    ANGEL CITY FC, UCLA BRUINS
    United States
    Nov 22, 2014
    Los Angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Hahaha right, perhaps evolution of the game ultimately leads to more flopping in the future who knows. Then my dad can hate both the women's game and men's game if he's still alive.
     

Share This Page