The champions want to be pd the same saly as their counterpts. pressure could them achieve their m

Alex Morgan

In an escalation of ongoing disputes over between the US s and US , the s have sued their employer. Any hopes that these issues were close to resolution have been ed.

Who on the USWNT is suing US and why?

A group of 28 s on the US s , essentiy the s that constitute the entire current pool, have signed on to a accusing their boss, the US Federation, of . The with acctions of w and the notion that US pd the mens more, despite the men achieving f less. For instance, the eges that the men get bonuses of as much as $17,625. The ian understands that is more than twice the amount the receive.

The men and e pd differently through structures they each collectively bgned for the get salies while the men e only pd through bonuses. But the eges that the federation made more competion avlable over to the men. If both s played 20 friendlies in a ye, the mai that s could have ened was $99,000 or $5,000 per while the s could have ened an aver of ound $263,000 or $13,000 per .

But the also with non-monety issues and the over treatment of the compa to the men. For instance, the mens egedly took 17 US -funded chter fs to and from s in 2017 while the took none. The played 62 es on tificial turf which is hder on the body over a four-ye span while the mens played just one. The US mens has also egedly benefitted from more and higher ticket prices for their s compa to the .

How has this been in the s?

If some of these complnts famili, t is a for that. This latest builds upon a w complnt five s filed in 2016 with the Equal Employment Commission, which is effectively terminated. Back then, the complnt was filed by e- , a current s Ale , , li Lloyd and Becky Sauerbrunn, and this complnt s of them ecept Solo, who is no er with the and has filed her own separate lawsuit agnst US .

Its no coincidence that this was filed on International s Day, either.

What is US s and how do they justify the dispity?

US hasnt formy responded to the complnt and it es the federation was off . But we k from the 2016 complnt that one of the federations s be that the collectively bgned for the contr they have. In 2016, US essentiy asked: how can it be if they agreed to the terms of the deal? After , the men and e pd very differently the get ye-round salies from the federation for playing with the and in the US -founded National s League. The men only get pd for making rosters and playing in s, and the ent asking to play under the same pay structure as the mens .

But from the s , they would gue that they bgned for as much as they could get so they could continue playing . Despite that, no one can bgn away their right not to be discriminated agnst. The eges that the s asked to receive equal competion to the men in contr negotiations, and when that was rejected, the asked for a revenue-shing agreement, which the federation also rejected.

In its defense, US has also cited higher revenues and higher attendance for the mens compa to the . Historicy, thats been a strong for the federation but not so much lately: since 2016 the s has brought in more revenue than the men. In the fiscal ye for 2016, the says, US projected a loss of ound $400,000 but ended the ye with $17.7m in profit due to the winning the 2015 and surging in ity. The latest released by the federation continues to show more revenue generated by the . The men didnt even qualify for the 2018 , losing out on what would have been big revenues.

How strong is the case and can the win?

Without king how US intends to respond, its difficult to say right . The specific numbers in the s e certnly compelling. The , for eample, says US gave a bonus to the men of $5.4m for their round of 16 eit at the 2014 , but the federation gave just $1.7m to the for winning the in 2015.

The relations battle not the legal one could end up being the most aspect of this case, .

Back in 2016, the five s who filed the EEOC complnt did a round of high-profile , including the Today Show and 60 Minutes, which put the federation under pressure. Discrepancies that were difficult to defend became talking points and pushed to the s in the fight. For instance, the men got per diems of $75 when ing abroad while the only got $60. The ened $1.20 for every ticket s to their s while the men got $1.50. The federation, embrassed by these discrepancies, quickly sought to remedy them.

What remns to be seen is whether something simil can hen agn: the case simply be decided by yers and judges, or could pressure prompt US to t ading some of the complnts from the ?

What does the mens think?

After the s filed their 2016 complnt, a quickly emerged of the s being pitted agnst the mens. Some of the s on the mens made comments that were unsupportive of the s efforts Alejandro Bedoya, for eample, gued that the s was too unique to epect between men and , and Graham Zusi awkwardly tried to make a distinction that the deserve more without proclming pay should be equal.

But the s union for the mens , which is in the middle of its own contr negotiations, says it fully supports the from the and has made pt of discussions with US .

We e committed to the concept of a revenue-shing to ad the US Federations mket realities and find a way towds fr competion, read a statement issued by the union. An equal di of revenue attributable to the MNT and WNT programs is our primy pursuit as we eng with the US Federation in collective bgning.

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/us



Related posts