Equal pay for Women's Soccer?
drummerboy said:
Economically, I don't see how you can make the argument. Men's soccer generates so much more revenue than women's, it just doesn't make sense.
Citation?
From the Atlantic, March 2019:
"According to a lawsuit filed on March 8 by the U.S. women’s national soccer team, these female athletes are being paid less than the men’s team, in some cases earning just 38 percent of pay per game. This, despite the fact that in recent years the women’s team has generated more profits and revenue for the U.S. Soccer Federation, earned larger viewing audiences, and played more games than the men’s team."
finnegan said:
drummerboy said:Citation?
Economically, I don't see how you can make the argument. Men's soccer generates so much more revenue than women's, it just doesn't make sense.
From the Atlantic, March 2019:
"According to a lawsuit filed on March 8 by the U.S. women’s national soccer team, these female athletes are being paid less than the men’s team, in some cases earning just 38 percent of pay per game. This, despite the fact that in recent years the women’s team has generated more profits and revenue for the U.S. Soccer Federation, earned larger viewing audiences, and played more games than the men’s team."
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/03/why-the-us-national-womens-soccer-team-is-suing/585202/
citation? I mean, it's not even close. In the World Cup, the women actually get a bigger share of the total than the men do.
The men still pull the World Cup money wagon. The men's World Cup in Russia generated over $6 billion in revenue, with the participating teams sharing $400 million, less than 7% of revenue. Meanwhile, the Women's World Cup is expected to earn $131 million for the full four-year cycle 2019-22 and dole out $30 million to the participating teams.
Also, a comparison between the men's team and women's team is not the appropriate one here. We're talking World Cup.
btw, that Atlantic article is a pretty poor piece of advocacy journalism. It gives no sense of the total revenue for American soccer, and laughingly brings up the disparity between the WNBA and the NBA, as if that were pertinent, and then follows up with all of the old familiar tropes about women/men pay disparity in general - as if they're connected to the soccer issue. They're not.
The soccer issue is simple economics. Soccer is a business. It generates x dollars in revenue, and the players get a percentage of that. But as of now we don't know what those (non World Cup) numbers are, so it's not possible to talk about fairness.
here's a much better article explaining the economics of American soccer.
It's complicated
Didn't have a chance to read the articles above but I did read an article on revenue from apparel.
It seems the women's soccer team has generated more sales than any men's soccer team according to the U.S. Soccer Federation and Nike.
I have never been a soccer fan, yet I found myself watching the first couple of games of the U.S. Women's Soccer World Cup. I put those games on because I was flipping through the channels and I saw they were playing. The last 4 games were a different story, I actually put reminders on my calendar so I didn't miss a game.
The women should be paid a lot more than they are getting paid now. Should it be the same as the men? No, but they should get a higher percentage of the net income including from the sales and sponsors. They have also been credited for the increased popularity in U.S. soccer, for both men and women since the 2015 World Cup. With this year's victory I can only see that increasing.
Professional women soccer players have to have second jobs because they can't live on their soccer salary.
the women’s soccer team generates more revenue in the US vs the US soccer team. but the men’s soccer industry as a whole is a multi- billion $ business and generates revenue probably 50x that of women’s soccer. This is not a smart place for an equal pay argument.
Since we are looking at the numbers;
US Women's World Cup Championships -4
US Men's World Cup Championships -Big Fat Zero
its shouldnt be a question of equal pay in relation to men, it should be a question of adequate compensation for the revenue being generated.
revenue generated is a bit of a trick question since most owners hide their revenues from players in the form of subsidiaries and shady accounting practices, but if a formula was found to allow the comparison, I see no reason that womens sports shouldnt be much higher paid and that the US womens soccer team should be compensated to a much larger degree.
As far as which team is king, er, queen on the world stage, theres no question.
conandrob240 said:
the women’s soccer team generates more revenue in the US vs the US soccer team. but the men’s soccer industry as a whole is a multi- billion $ business and generates revenue probably 50x that of women’s soccer. This is not a smart place for an equal pay argument.
The USWNT is suing the U.S. Soccer Federation(derives it's revenue / sponsorships from the USMNT and USWNT teams), so the over global market has nothing to do with it.
From an SI article:
https://wwwsi.com/soccer/2019/06/21/uswnt-us-soccer-mediation-equal-pay-gender-discrimination-lawsuit
The Wall Street Journal recently audited U.S. Soccer financial statements and found that between 2016 and 2018–after the U.S. women won the 2015 Women's World Cup–USWNT games generated $50.8 million in revenue while USMNT games generated 2% less, $49.9 million.
In addition, it's not just about the pay, it's about the facilities and accommodations being less than the men's team. In the Washington Post article above, if the men win 20 games and the women win 20 games, the women make 11% less. The women should be paid the same. It shouldn't be a matter of revenue but one of principle.
Regards,
RCH
no, not really. Then we’d have to say that every CEO, regardless of how much a company makes, should be paid the same because the job is the same. Or that every actor deserves equal pay regardless of how the movie performs. And so on. The pay should absolutely be dictated by the revenue/viewership, etc.
conandrob240 said:
no, not really. Then we’d have to say that every CEO, regardless of how much a company makes, should be paid the same because the job is the same. Or that every actor deserves equal pay regardless of how the movie performs. And so on. The pay should absolutely be dictated by the revenue/viewership, etc.
I disagree. Although we aren't there yet, most "equal pay" advocates (and others) agree that men and women should be paid the same for doing the same job within the same company. So men and women should be paid the same within US Soccer.
How much do the U.S. women get paid for being in the world cup? Winning the World cup? For a regular season game as professional player? Now answer the same questions for the U.S.
sac said:
conandrob240 said:I disagree. Although we aren't there yet, most "equal pay" advocates (and others) agree that men and women should be paid the same for doing the same job within the same company. So men and women should be paid the same within US Soccer.
no, not really. Then we’d have to say that every CEO, regardless of how much a company makes, should be paid the same because the job is the same. Or that every actor deserves equal pay regardless of how the movie performs. And so on. The pay should absolutely be dictated by the revenue/viewership, etc.
But it’s not the “same company”, that’s my point. They are vastly different in terms of viewership, revenue produced, etc. Look at the WNBA and the NBA- Should WNBA players be paid like NBA players? No way.
sac said:
conandrob240 said:I disagree. Although we aren't there yet, most "equal pay" advocates (and others) agree that men and women should be paid the same for doing the same job within the same company. So men and women should be paid the same within US Soccer.
no, not really. Then we’d have to say that every CEO, regardless of how much a company makes, should be paid the same because the job is the same. Or that every actor deserves equal pay regardless of how the movie performs. And so on. The pay should absolutely be dictated by the revenue/viewership, etc.
So all baseball players should make the same salary because they do the "same job"?
You need to re-think this.
conandrob240 said:
But it’s not the “same company”, that’s my point. They are vastly different in terms of viewership, revenue produced, etc. Look at the WNBA and the NBA- Should WNBA players be paid like NBA players? No way.
I don’t think it’s that simple. Both the men’s and women’s teams are governed by the same USSF, same president. Seems to me that it’s a quasi government agency with some taxpayer funding going to certain things. My understanding is that the USSF is a creation of federal law.
You can’t compare this to NBA/WNBA - those are completely private entities that do not represent the country. Don’t confuse this USWNT team with the dozen or so local teams that many of the US women play for.
I’m not confusing anything. I understand they are different. But so is women’s vs men’s soccer.
In the US, women's and men's National soccer teams seem more comparable to women's and men's Olympic gymnastics than to women's and men's local basketball teams.
How about a US Men vs. US Women Soccer game. For all the marbles.
Which men would you choose to include in their starting lineup -- without using the Google?
The question behind my question was: How many on the US Men's team can most Americans even name? From your answer, it looks like none.
The US Women's team has far more name recognition.
Robert_Casotto said:
How about a US Men vs. US Women Soccer game. For all the marbles.
Oh look, it's Ben Shapiro.
Tennis is the only sport I can think of where the commercial interest in male and female athletes is the same. I haven’t checked but I would think the pay would be the same.
As for soccer, commercial interest in the USA is low in general. Outside of the World Cup who follows women’s soccer? Even in the USA where there is a very popular team, now that the World Cup is over, how many people go to the games or watch the matches in regular season play?
Men’s soccer in the states doesn’t come close to other sports commercially. Internationally soccer is huge but how much interest is there in women’s soccer in other countries, counties that don’t have winning teams?
I would guess that the stand out players from the Women’s team will make far more money than the men’s players in sponsorships and endorsements. Is that fair? Since all of the players played the same game should they all get the same deals from sponsors?
What about models, should male models get paid the same as female models for the same work, even tho nobody can name a male model?
With the amount of visibility of this case, I'm betting there will be changes made to make things appear more equitable.
That said, I am reading that there are a few differences in the men's and women's bargaining agreements, such as more risk and fewer benefits in the men's contracts than the women's. So, it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
sprout said:
With the amount of visibility of this case, I'm betting there will be changes made to make things appear more equitable.
That said, I am reading that there are a few differences in the men's and women's bargaining agreements, such as more risk and fewer benefits in the men's contracts than the women's. So, it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
This is because all of the men's team make decent salaries at their clubs, thus playing on the national team is really more about honor than income. Most of these guys make decent salaries. Michael Bradley makes about $6.5 million a season at Toronto. Jozy Altidore makes about $6 million in total compensation. It's a little harder to dig up salaries for some of the players playing abroad but I'm pretty sure Pulisic will be getting paid pretty darn well at Chelsea. Even a younger player who hasn't moved to Europe yet (Bradley and Altidore went and came back) like Aaron Long with the New York Red Bulls gets about $800K a year.
The NWSL has a cap of $41K for a player, $410K for a team. So someone who isn't a 'star*' player like Bradley, Altidore or Pulisic like Aaron Long gets 2 NWSL teams worth of pay a season. (*Now, a real question is if Bradley and perhaps Altidore are really the stars they're supposed to be, but that's another topic for another day!)
Just because random people that don't follow men's soccer don't know the names doesn't mean that what goes on on the men's side is entirely small potatoes.
And that's the big difference. The men's side is really part of the global football economy, where the best players from established clubs play some extra games for their country as an honor. On the women's side, this is their bread and butter, and the national team essentially keeps the star players happy enough that they can play in the domestic league where they essentially don't get paid.
There are differences on just about every level. The best solution should be for people to support the women's league to the point where these women get real salaries from their day jobs, but that league is on relatively pretty shaky footing - with the NJ team being pretty much the shakiest at the moment.
So while I'm somewhat sympathetic to their cause, I do think they're over simplifying the issue.
drummerboy said:
Economically, I don't see how you can make the argument. Men's soccer generates so much more revenue than women's, it just doesn't make sense.
Should the WNBA get paid the same as the NBA? Of course not.
Should women's soccer get paid more? Probably. But equal? No.
This would make sense, if women were allowed to play in the NBA or in men's soccer. Otherwise, the argument is basically "women don't do the same job as men so they shouldn't be paid the same, but also they're not allowed to do the higher paying jobs."
PVW said:
drummerboy said:This would make sense, if women were allowed to play in the NBA or in men's soccer. Otherwise, the argument is basically "women don't do the same job as men so they shouldn't be paid the same, but also they're not allowed to do the higher paying jobs."
Economically, I don't see how you can make the argument. Men's soccer generates so much more revenue than women's, it just doesn't make sense.
Should the WNBA get paid the same as the NBA? Of course not.
Should women's soccer get paid more? Probably. But equal? No.
And to make the point stick, worth noting that this is a common problem across all fields, not just athletics. The argument that it's not fair to compare women's pay to men's because they aren't doing the same work neatly sidesteps the whole question of why women on the whole work in lower paying jobs, industries, and positions.
no, they ARE doing the same “work”. They’re just doing it for vastly different “companies”. You don’t expect a VP at a small, faltering company to be compensated the same as one at a highly successful company even though their job might be the same.
For Sale
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Advertisement
Economically, I don't see how you can make the argument. Men's soccer generates so much more revenue than women's, it just doesn't make sense.
Should the WNBA get paid the same as the NBA? Of course not.
Should women's soccer get paid more? Probably. But equal? No.