The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute

[The Beaver 2.0]

1 hour ago, clamlinguine said:

Disband women's teams that demand equal pay when they can't draw flys to their games.

 

But the national side draws big crowds. And why disband? Seems unnecessary. 

[Unnamed Trialist]

6 hours ago, red card said:

 

Wheeler made a few phone calls and talked to a few people and the only thing clear is that he knows nothing more than a gas fitter and a masseuse with their Canada scarfs on. 

 

[footballfreak]

2 hours ago, clamlinguine said:

Disband women's teams that demand equal pay when they can't draw flys to their games.

[Unnamed Trialist]

People are confusing concepts here. 

1. You get paid to represent the national team. Everyone called up. Then there may be differentiation for starters, subs, bench, but some NTs don't do that (unfair to 2nd keeper, etc). 

2. You complement appearance pay with conditions. Like flights, hotels. Even material. We had a situation like this with the women back in the Charmaine Hooper days. 

We seem to be doing alright in pts 1 and 2 lately. 

3. Incentives and bonuses. Agreed to before a tournament or round of matches. Results. We assume the players had bonuses agreed to before WC qualifying for this, since some players may not get to the WC but helped qualify. If they didn't, that could be a reason there's more pressure to sort this out now. That also could be the reason for the 33 players reference, but suggests they did not have a qualification bonus signed previously. That's on the captains if they did not push for that beforehand. 

I think just making Qatar should be rewarded in our case, but that the revenue used for this should be previous to (apart from) the FIFA payouts. 

4. Qatar. We can't argue about what others do since every country is different. Others won't pay any extra if they don't get past the group. Others have more or less revenue. In our case IMO just playing deserves a core bonus and % of the payout. I'd add to that for points won, wins. As getting out of the group garners higher FIFA payouts, players would try to get a % of those. It seems the % should rise in our case for every extra step we achieve. 

5. This matters as it's standard player bonus stuff. But also because we have huge salary differences amongst the men, not as much as the women (where NCAA amateurs play alongside those making 250k), but still. 60,000 here or there matters little to some and is almost a year's salary for others. This is part of the logic of the captains ensuring minimums: it makes more difference to the guys on modest salaries. 

6. We have to differentiate between money for players and money for a programme. If equity sharing is done, that sound like pooling for a programme and not some deal where a Kennedy header puts money in Grosso's pocket. One thing is pooling for future payouts, enriching them over time, another is direct payouts to players. What did the women get as a bonus for winning gold? 

7. That 33 players reference throws me off but let's say 25 players go to Qatar. A million in bonus, 10%,would give them 40,000 each for the first round, which from what I've seen would be the lowest bonus of all teams. 40% would mean 160k each, better but still not anything that high compared to other nations.

Experienced nations going to the WC know how to monetize it, they even have deals where sponsors pay more for greater goals reached. We don't seem to have this worked out, so the CSA seems incapable of understanding that qualifying is supposed to enable income well beyond the FIFA payouts. 

8. Consider this: just the missed benefits from the Iran debacle (thinking if it had been Algeria or Ecuador it would have also sold out), which I calculate as over 2 million, would have covered most of the difference left on the bargaining table. 

9. I don't care that much about the whole family travel and tickets business. But since the CSA gets an allotment, if they're not going to the players they are going to the president of Soccer Nova Scotia and to some Bontis brother in law. So better to family of players and coaching staff than to the CSA patronage network. 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Unnamed Trialist

[InglewoodJack]

4 hours ago, clamlinguine said:

Disband women's teams that demand equal pay when they can't draw flys to their games.

 

Why would we disband our best soccer team? Sounds stupid. 

[Ivan]

Is this really a surprise to anyone?  With every country, and every walk of life, when you have leverage you use it.  Canadian players finally have their leverage.  The only surprise for me is that we didn't hear it earlier.

[Canuckia]

[SpecialK]

If 30-40% is pretty much the going standard rate for national teams. Give them the money! The CSA is still going to make money off this World Cup. Just because the US did a joint agreement doesn’t mean we have too. I don’t understand why the mens and womens national team need the same agreement here. Now I am not saying this because of sexism. The women’s team should get a fair deal too . I am saying the women’s and men teams have different needs and request. They have different structures/way things are organized. For example the CSA has an agreed to help for players Salaries in the NWSL. The womens team trains more and goes to way more Friendlies plus they have gone to the Olympics and World Cup pretty much every time. My opinion each team should stay in each other lane and get the best deal for each team. 

Edited June 5, 2022 by SpecialK

[Cheeta]

17 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

Giving new meaning to the term "brotherhood"....

 

Not from where I sit.  🙂

Settled or not I'll be surprised if the match isn't played today.  Can't see the players doing that to the supports.  Point has been made and this will not be going away until it is settled. 

Would also be surprised if there haven't been some right proper, good old fashioned yelling matches behind the closed doors over at CSA HQ. 

[canuckgbp]

 

[scullion44]

30-30 with who?

[Gian-Luca]

5 minutes ago, scullion44 said:

30-30 with who?

The women’s team 

[Unnamed Trialist]

4 minutes ago, scullion44 said:

30-30 with who?

The CSA is seriously confused. They should take their income from FIFA and roll it into the women's program. If they so chose. 

It has nothing to do with the men getting a % of the FIFA payout as their WC bonus. 

What I suspect is that the CSA is trying to make the players seem gender insensitive by throwing that spanner into the negotiation. 

[BearcatSA]

17 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

Giving new meaning to the term "brotherhood"....

 

 

 

[SpecialK]

4 minutes ago, scullion44 said:

30-30 with who?

30 for the men’s team 

30 for The women’s team 

does this mean they are pooling the prize money from both world cups ? 

[Alex]

Yeah, the question I have is did the men see money from the many world cups the women played in? 

[CanadianSoccerFan]

9 minutes ago, scullion44 said:

 

Edited June 5, 2022 by CanadianSoccerFan

[SpecialK]

1 minute ago, Alex said:

Yeah, the question I have is did the men see money from the many world cups the women played in? 

I have gut feeling they didn’t. 
why is the womens team entitled to the men’s prize money? Just as why is the mens team entitled to theirs . 

[red card]

8 minutes ago, Alex said:

Yeah, the question I have is did the men see money from the many world cups the women played in? 

If it is patterned after the US deal, men and women's World Cup money is pooled. 

But it doesn't benefit the men that much. The winner of the last Women's World Cup got US$2 million. Canada men will get US$10 million just for making the World Cup + US$2 million prep money.

The US men gave it all away by agreeing to share 50/50 unless they believe FIFA is going to really close the prize money gap between the men and women's World Cup even though the revenues generated aren't going to close materially anytime soon.

Then the US Fed gave it all away by agreeing to give 90% of both this cycle's World Cup to the players and then 80% for 26/27 World Cups.

It's a mistake for the Canadian players to solely rely upon the US model. Many have said they want the sport to grow - be the pioneer in making Canada a soccer nation. So, asking for 80%+ for themselves means less development funding.

In other nations where the players are making million+, they donate the money to charity anyway. 

[SpecialK]

Question- what if the mens team says- no we want our prize money and the women's team can keep theirs. This pool idea is BS. The women's program can go shovel snow. 
this has the potential to get even uglier. 

[king1010]

I dont understand the logic of the women getting half of the 60% of the mens world cup money. 

[SpecialK]

Equal pay. But it’s not equal because the mens players never got any of their prize money before.  I am sure of it because the women players would be complaining about it. 
 

 

[cornerkick]

nothing new, but the story is getting coverage outside Canada now.  Confirmation that there was no training on Saturday also

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/jun/05/canada-soccer-strike-panama-friendly-training

[Shway]

6 hours ago, SpecialK said:

Question- what if the mens team says- no we want our prize money and the women's team can keep theirs. This pool idea is BS. The women's program can go shovel snow. 
this has the potential to get even uglier. 

There’s so many other outliers where the woman’s program/players have benefited in ways the mens haven't.

The CSA like the USSF was paying a certain amount of national team players a base salary to offset their WPSL contracts. That didn’t exist for the men because the reality was that their was 3 MLS professional clubs employing Canadian players - although the number of national team players for each team wasn’t that high.

I don’t think the USM&WNT situation isn’t comparable for our men and women for the basic info we know.

We know their woman’s team have been perennial champions.

We know the USSF charges out the ass for their games, and they typically get sellouts and generate large revenues in which the players get a percentage from that. They’ve been doing this for years, whereas our mens team have just seen recent attendance success.

In this world we live in now “equal pay” is more about inclusivity then actual results. As equal pay should mean an equal product, and although the game is evolving everyone knows its not remotely comparable.

Sticky situation the men are in if they are asking the USMNT as the situations aren’t the same.

Edited June 5, 2022 by Shway

[OhCanadaOhBaby]

55 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

The CSA is seriously confused. They should take their income from FIFA and roll it into the women's program. If they so chose. 

It has nothing to do with the men getting a % of the FIFA payout as their WC bonus. 

What I suspect is that the CSA is trying to make the players seem gender insensitive by throwing that spanner into the negotiation. 

I disagree. Achieving pay equity with the womens team from a World Cup birth has been the plan as far back as 2018 when Herdman took over. What quote have we heard from him repeated over and over again? - That he knew he couldn’t take the womens team any further without the funding from a mens World Cup birth. That’s why he moved to the mens, that’s what he’s been working at this whole time. 
 

the fact that the CSA want pay equity should not come as a surprise to anyone, and to say they just threw it in now to make the players look bad would be a massively shortsighted opinion.

the more I think about it, the more simple this entire equation is. The CSA have just made a very fair offer to the players with 30-30 considering their financial situation. As long as the CSA are willing to budge on the family tickets point ever so slightly, this should be resolved very soon. I think if the players are given the 30% plus tickets and means for all immediate family members to attend matches and DONT take it, this is on them and their greed. Looking at some other top nations (granted their financial situation is much better) players are still not getting as much as the Canadians would get.