On February 12th, 2020, the players association representing the men's national soccer team made a public statement that sends shock waves through the United States soccer community. If we are to believe the statement they made, it effectively draws back the curtain on previously confidential negotiations between the United States Soccer Federation and its professional players. At best, this statement hints to the inner workings of United States soccer and suggests some ways in which leadership can improve the system. At worst, their statement cripples trust and condemns our system as deeply flawed. At the very least, it draws people like you and I into the debate around discrimination and fair pay. Let's talk about it.
A Tipping Point (The Lawsuit from USWNT)
On March 8th, 2019, the United States Women's National Team filed a gender discrimination lawsuit against U.S. Soccer in federal court. This lawsuit, case number 2:29-CV-01717, is a class action complaint, 25 pages long, brought by current and former members of the US Women's National Team with the help of the legal firm Winston & Strawn LLP. It alleges violations of the Equal Pay Act (EPA), and title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The USSF discriminates against Plaintiffs, and the class that they seek to represent, by paying them less than members of the MNT for substantially equal work and by denying them at least equal playing, training, and travel conditions; equal promotion of their games; equal support and development for their games; and other terms and conditions of employment equal to the MNT.
USWNT
The lawsuit "seeks an end to the USSF’s discriminatory practices, and an award to make Plaintiffs and the class whole, as well as to provide for liquidated and punitive damages and all other appropriate relief."
It might help to understand this dispute as one between employers (USSF) and labor (the USWNT in this case). The WNT is presenting themselves as employees of USSF, a 501(c)3 nonprofit. They represent that they receive pay and a series of benefits from USSF such as coaches, trainers, nutritionists, doctors, massage therapists, etc. To give you some context around staffing, at the USSF annual general meeting (AGM) on the 14th of February, USSF revealed that the USWNT has a staff of 35 people caring for 23 players.
In addition to staffing, the class action reveals the USSF provides other benefits like deciding the number of games that will be played, where they will be played, practice fields, locker rooms, game surfaces, exercise equipment, scheduling times, transportation, and more.
The WNT claims that USSF provides centralized management and control, that the women require equal skill, effort and responsibilities as their male counterparts, and that the women have "Achieved unmatched success in International soccer leading to substantial profits for the USSF as
Some stats the WNT cite include three World Cup titles and four Olympic Gold Medals. They point out that they were three-time winners of the U.S. Olympic Committee's Team of the Year Award, and Sports Illustrated's Athlete of the Year. They're ranked number one in the World, a position they've held for ten out of the last eleven years.
They claim to have generated "substantial" revenue and profits for the USSF. This is a claim I questioned as I read through the materials in preparation for this show. As President of a 501(c)3 nonprofit myself, I know it is not legal to generate profit in the pure sense. For your information, what we might call "profit" in the nonprofit world is usually classified as "retained earnings." In other words, money generated must be recycled back into support of the mission - something I may talk more about at another time.
There are several references in this class action to "profit," "net loss," and "net profit" that I hope can be better clarified with the help of an actual nonprofit accounting professional. Using these terms the way they are used in this complaint makes me suspicious of the way the math was done and the assumptions made. But that's the investment banker in me. I'm not an accounting professional trained in fund accounting - the type of accounting used by nonprofits.
To summarize the rest, WNT cite the many ways the WNT and the MNT are similar, several ways they are different, and claim that they are being unfairly treated. Claims that come with plenty of examples.
The complaint further states:
Women played nineteen more games than the men from 2015 through 2018.
Under the current pay structure in effect from January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2018, MNT players receive a minimum amount of $5,000 per game, but these numbers range between $6,250 - $17,625 per game depending on the level of opponent they play and the outcome of the game.
The WNT, in contrast, is only compensated if they win games against FIFA ranked top-ten teams. There is no compensation for tie games, lost games, or games played against teams ranked outside of FIFA's top ten.
In an article published on February 21st, Forbes.com writes that the Associated Press (AP) reported that Megan Rapinoe said that U.S. Soccer lawyer Russell Sawyer told her "Market realities are such that the women do not deserve to be paid equally to the men." Wow! follow that thread... While this quote is referenced in the original complaint, the source of the quote was not known to me until I read the Forbes.com article.
If you want me to dissect the WNT lawsuit more, let me know. You can read all 25 pages yourself from the list of resources in my show notes below, or you can ask me to go into more detail in another episode. For now, I'll leave this part of the discussion with a general comment that the lawsuit is full of specific example, assumptions, and math that seem to raise enough issues for me to be hopeful that it gets worked out properly in the court. I'm no lawyer, but from what I've read in the complaint, the WNT has made a case that compels discussion.
Please: support the show and join our community as a Patron through my Patreon page
US Soccer Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA)
To understand the statement made by USNSTPA, it's good to know that the way that men and women national team players negotiate what they will be paid is through what's called a Collective Bargaining Agreement or "CBA." CBA's for the men and for the women are negotiated separately. The last men's CBA was executed (signed) in 2011 for the 2011-2018 time frame. The last women's CBA was executed in 2017 for the 2017-2021 time frame. The men are reportedly playing on an expired CBA now.
CBA's are negotiated for multi-year terms. They may be negotiated on several points beyond the issue of pay, and might include additional terms. Since they are currently negotiated by different parties in different years and different economic conditions, it seems unlikely that the men's and women's agreements will be exactly the same, even under the best of circumstances.
The latest WNT CBA included significant increases in pay, maternity and marketing rights, and other benefits, but it did not include a specific statement equal pay with the men's team. It was reported in PasteMagazine.com that "There were some real structural issues that made it nearly impossible for the WNT to secure a pay structure equal to their male counterparts— namely that WNT players are US Soccer employees and MNT players are not."
The Public Statement From USNSTPA
On February 12th, the United States National Soccer Team Players Association (USNSTPA) issued a public statement on their Website that not only brought the WNT lawsuit back to top of mind for US Soccer stakeholders, but it further accused USSF of a long standing pattern of unfair treatment and attempts to change the public narrative around the issues. The statement walks the reader through 40 years of history and lots of conflict between individual players and the Federation. They made their statement after what they claim were 24 years of confidential dealings with USSF - all the more reason to take a closer look at why they would be saying what they are saying and why they're saying it now.
The statement alleges that the USSF is "...working hard to sell a false narrative to the public and even members of Congress."
By coming forward, "USNSTPA hopes to create a better understanding and perhaps bring about a resolution" to the grievances brought forward by the USWNT.
It claims that ""The US Soccer Federation, like all US National Governing Bodies for Olympic, Paralympic, or Pan American Games sports, has monopoly control over which athletes will be allowed to represent the United States."
It claims that "Historically, the Federation has used that monopoly power as a weapon against the players. For many years they refused to pay players at all. The Federation benefitted from ticket sales, sponsorship, and merchandising while paying players as little as possible. Even now, they use player names, photos, and footage to create implied endorsements by players of Federation sponsors and sponsor products the players do not use, while not paying the players."
It claims that "USMNT and USWNT players have always received less than fair compensation when playing for the National Teams."
It claims that "The Federation norm is forcing players to play under expired collective bargaining agreements, sometimes for over two years. Historically, the Federation has justified its unreasonable proposals by claiming its financial future was uncertain. The Federation still claims it cannot afford to pay the players a fair share of the Federation’s revenue from selling the efforts of those players to fans, sponsors, and television."
It claims that "2011-2018 were spectacular years of financial growth and prosperity for the Federation. While USMNT player compensation went up 25% over those eight years,
