The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute

[Ansem]

Nailed it with this

Raise your hand if you have a say in with your employer's business deals?

 

[BrennanFan]

All of this is pathetic.  

[Unnamed Trialist]

11 minutes ago, shorty said:

These are 2x larger than they should be. You divided 4.6m by 26 and 23, not 2.3m. Doesn’t change the thrust of your post or your analysis. Just in case someone was wondering why those numbers were bigger. 

I'm tired af but wanted to finish....sorry 

[eramosat]

27 minutes ago, BrennanFan said:

All of this is pathetic.  

I think that is something everyone can agree with, from any perspective, as it seems to have distributed the pain equally.  Except to Nick Bontis.  

 

[Meepmeep]

1 hour ago, narduch said:

TSN does suck though.

It’s better than Sportsnet but that’s a low bar.  

 

Times are changing.    The Raps broke through the glass ceiling when they won the 🏆   The men’s team captured millions of eyes during the qualifying.  
The days where hockey and it’s xenophobic undertones is stealing all of the oxygen in the Canadian sports landscape are numbered. 

Maybe the people in the CPL towns aren’t seeing it yet but it’ll spread there soon enough.    
 

There’s good reason to be bullish on the prospects of soccer in Canada.   We just need some confident people who believe in the prospects of the game in leadership though. 

Edited March 10, 2023 by Meepmeep

[Ansem]

 

 

[ag futbol]

43 minutes ago, Ansem said:

Nailed it with this

Raise your hand if you have a say in with your employer's business deals?

 

If it ties into my compensation or your ability as my employer to compensate me you better fucking believe I want a say on it. Otherwise, I’ll find greener pastures elsewhere.

[Ansem]

3 minutes ago, ag futbol said:

If it ties into my compensation or your ability as my employer to compensate me you better fucking believe I want a say on it. Otherwise, I’ll find greener pastures elsewhere.

That's not the point I was making - we all want to have a say and we all contribute to our employer's financial health but the reality is that very very few people actually do.

Should the players have a say? Maybe once they get representation because they haven't demonstrated that they fully understand the business side of it. A union helps in that regard as they could be in a better position to explain it to them.

It's all about nuance - nothing's black and white

[ag futbol]

3 minutes ago, Ansem said:

That's not the point I was making - we all want to have a say and we all contribute to our employer's financial health but the reality is that very very few people actually do.

Should the players have a say? Maybe once they get representation because they haven't demonstrated that they fully understand the business side of it. A union helps in that regard as they could be in a better position to explain it to them.

It's all about nuance - nothing's black and white

Uh huh. Seems like you’re backtracking in the face of obvious counterpoints and otherwise have your own agenda.

But please, don’t let the rest of us interrupt you talking in circles. 

[An Observer]

1 hour ago, zeelaw said:

It's astonishingly different. 

Probably less informed.  And lets be honest, there are a whole group of people who would just need jerk support a group of women calling out inequality and discriminatory treatment without taking any time to understand the facts and the extent of the truth behind those claims.

[Ansem]

4 minutes ago, ag futbol said:

Uh huh. Seems like you’re backtracking in the face of obvious counterpoints and otherwise have your own agenda.

But please, don’t let the rest of us interrupt you talking in circles. 

I'm not backtracking, it's fact that its not the norm for workers to have a say on their employer's business decisions.

Another takeaway was perhaps someone representing them on the board makes sense, which is more common in Europe than in North America.

As of now, no that demand doesn't make sense - especially when they are implying that they should be consulted for coach nominations. Clearly, the time isn't now

[SF]

27 minutes ago, Ansem said:

I'm not backtracking, it's fact that its not the norm for workers to have a say on their employer's business decisions.

Another takeaway was perhaps someone representing them on the board makes sense, which is more common in Europe than in North America.

As of now, no that demand doesn't make sense - especially when they are implying that they should be consulted for coach nominations. Clearly, the time isn't now

Agree that the players seem a bit lost in the process.

Frankly, however, that's a very secondary point. The CSA Board has a number of stakeholders it needs to represent - national team players being one of them. 

The CSA has clearly lost the trust of this stakeholder group due to a lack, or perceived lack, of transparency.

So, yes, normally a Board or management team don't consult all stakeholders when making business decisions, but they do need to understand the perspective of these stakeholders and account for this in their decision making.

This is a failure of governance. A big one.

[SthMelbRed]

1 hour ago, ag futbol said:

If it ties into my compensation or your ability as my employer to compensate me you better fucking believe I want a say on it. Otherwise, I’ll find greener pastures elsewhere.

All due respect, but you're out to lunch if you think that rank-and-file employees are consulted on high-level business or hiring decisions in any company. You may also be deluding yourself about your level of influence with your own employer, too. I wouldn't recommend walking into your COO's office and demanding that he accept your input into the hiring of your line manager.

[Ottawafan]

24 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

All due respect, but you're out to lunch if you think that rank-and-file employees are consulted on high-level business or hiring decisions in any company. You may also be deluding yourself about your level of influence with your own employer, too. I wouldn't recommend walking into your COO's office and demanding that he accept your input into the hiring of your line manager.

The CSA should be looking at the players as more of a partnership in growing the game.  So ya the players should have more say in things. 

[SthMelbRed]

4 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

The CSA should be looking at the players as more of a partnership in growing the game.  So ya the players should have more say in things. 

Perhaps a few key players might be discretely asked about names on a coaching shortlist, but anything on the business side of things, no chance.

[Shway]

2 hours ago, ag futbol said:

If it ties into my compensation or your ability as my employer to compensate me you better fucking believe I want a say on it. Otherwise, I’ll find greener pastures elsewhere.

In football world - retire or refuse call ups. I can’t stress my sentiment that the national team isn’t supposed to be your main source of income (wmnt)

Everything has been about the players compensation, and less about the foundation.

I want to know as the fan, how or what remaining money will be dedicated to youth camps and greater development. Because right now in my eyes, our qualification to the WC was as good as when Trinidad or Panama qualified - anomaly. And a lot of other women’s programs are emerging and getting better.

With these great request for money, I just want them to win.

Edited March 10, 2023 by Shway

[Shway]

4 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

Perhaps a few key players might be discretely asked about names on a coaching shortlist, but anything on the business side of things, no chance.

Do these players have contracts? Shares in the organizations? In no national team does players have a say in who’s the coach.

The entitlement is crazy. These people need to take time.

[The Real Marc]

14 minutes ago, Shway said:

In football world - retire or refuse call ups. I can’t stress my sentiment that the national team isn’t suppose to be you’re main source of income (wmnt)

I think many of the women have to rely on the WNT is their main source of income so, I have to say, while I find those whole thing insanely unstrategic, entitled, and shortsighted, I at least understand their issue.

But this whole idea of going on strike is just absolutely mind boggling. Labour law or not, this is not an employer. This is a voluntary representation arrangement. Don't like the terms, don't participate. Don't think being representing Canada in international bobsled is lucrative enough? Find something else. Soccer? Turn down the call up. (But heh then there's definitely no money.)

Never thought I'd miss the days when we called up Niall Thompsons and Jeff Clarkes. I have no doubt they would have demanded a greater slice too, just there wasn't enough to go around back then so they couldn't I guess.

Edited March 10, 2023 by The Real Marc

[Shway]

Under these terms not a single player on the men’s national team will be paid more money from the CSA than their club salary.

Under these terms +80% of the women will be paid more than their club salary by the CSA.

[Shway]

Okay I’m going to say this, and it will probably not be liked but whatever….

Equal pay, but not an equal product.
Equal pay but can’t beat a boys U15 team. So why do we compare?
Equal pay but not equal interest.
Equal pay but not equal value.

I’m not sorry but this equal shit should only be brought up in the corporate world, where level of education, experience or work has no gender or physical hindrance of one’s overall performance. 

I have waved the flag about  more women CEO, I wave the flag to women being in higher positions and being equally paid to the men counterparts. Their results are consistent and if not better to where we need to see mass change towards women in the corporate world. 

Sport now….. Sport is entertainment. People can’t be morally forced to think men and women/x sports are equal….because they are not, and they will never be. It’s the reason we are separated. God or science didn’t genetically make us that way. The only sports that can argue equal entertainment value is Tennis, Curling, and Golf. But somehow there’s a continued fight against reality and I’m sick of it. 

[Bison44]

3 hours ago, ag futbol said:

If it ties into my compensation or your ability as my employer to compensate me you better fucking believe I want a say on it. Otherwise, I’ll find greener pastures elsewhere.

You quit a lot of jobs do you??  I've never been in management, never had a say in any deal the company was making or what direction they were going.  I've been at companies where they laid off entire sections, and hired new divisions with millions of dollars of equipment and no one ever asked me what I thought the company should do, or who my supervisor was etc.  Quit if you want, thats always your right, but what companies are you working for where they bring you into the board meetings to decide this kind of stuff??  

[Obinna]

1 hour ago, Shway said:

Under these terms not a single player on the men’s national team will be paid more money from the CSA than their club salary.

Under these terms +80% of the women will be paid more than their club salary by the CSA.

The free market has been telling these girls what they are worth in the club game, but at the end of the day the bulk of their income will come from the publically funded CSA. Feels like a shake down to be honest, but it also doesn't involve or affect me. Really, it's none of my business. 

I do have an unpopular opinion on it, however:

The fact the women are trying to spin a narrative of sexism to increase their earnings, rather than being satisfied with their compensation earned from their God-given natural talents playing soccer, strikes me as being inherently greedy and lacking in morality, but what I find even worse are the cowards who go along with it. These are the type of people who know the bloody difference but fear being called politically incorrect, as if that were equivalent to dying some sort of physical death. I am specifically thinking about the comment about making things equal in an unequal world. Wasn't that the CSA?

Anyways, I have very little respect for the CWNT in this situation, but I give them more respect than these chumps, because at least the women have much to gain and little to lose from gaming the system with this charade. These chumps at the CSA on the other hand have nothing to gain from appeasing the cult of political correctness, and everything to lose (as we are seeing).

None of these committments appear to make the CSA stronger financially, just weaker. Nice own goal there, CSA!

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Scott Mitchell chimes in to what can be described as mixed reviews at best on twitter:

Is CSB's investment really bigger than MLSE's if you take into account money spent on BMO Field, Lamport and Downsview, the Academy, signing players like Insigne, Bernardeschi and Giovinco over the years? Doubt it

[Ansem]

14 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Scott Mitchell chimes in to what can be described as mixed reviews at best on twitter:

Is CSB's investment really bigger than MLSE's if you take into account money spent on BMO Field, Lamport and Downsview, the Academy, signing players like Insigne, Bernardeschi and Giovinco over the years? Doubt it

CPL guarantees a minimum of 48 Canadians starting each weeks + 2000 youth minutes per clubs + opportunities & jobs for refs, coaches, execs, media, content, medical professionals, admin etc...

Says a lot about you to think this matters less than signing Giovinco and the "bloody big deal" guy who checked out pretty fast.

What a poor take

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

24 minutes ago, Obinna said:

... The fact the women are trying to spin a narrative of sexism to increase their earnings, rather than being satisfied with their compensation earned from their God-given natural talents playing soccer, strikes me as being inherently greedy and lacking in morality, ...

The effect of the CSB deal at the moment is to take money out of women's soccer national programs to prop up a men's pro league and only a men's pro league. The people who negotiated that deal had an agenda that clearly didn't emphasize gender equity and hence this can easily be portrayed as a prime example of old school sexism. In 2023, it would be very difficult to justify having a body representing Canada as a national entity that receives federal funding pay more to men than to women for doing the same thing.

Edited March 10, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot