US Soccer reaches milestone agreement for equal pay for women’s and men’s teams — plus World Cup prize money

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
70,063
49,517
113
The U.S. Soccer Federation reached milestone agreements to pay its men’s and women’s teams equally, making the American national governing body the first in the sport to promise both sexes matching money.

The federation announced separate collective bargaining agreements through December 2028 with the unions for both national teams on Wednesday, ending years of often acrimonious negotiations.
The men have been playing under the terms of a CBA that expired in December 2018. The women's CBA expired at the end of March, but talks continued after the federation and the players agreed to settle a gender discrimination lawsuit brought by some of the players in 2019. The settlement was contingent on the federation reaching labor contracts that equalized pay and bonuses between the two teams.

Led by Alex Morgan and Megan Rapinoe, American women long have pressed for gender equity.






“I feel a lot of pride for the girls who are going to see this growing up, and recognize their value rather than having to fight for it. However, my dad always told me that you don’t get rewarded for doing what you’re supposed to do — and paying men and women equally is what you’re supposed to do,” U.S. forward Margaret Purce said. “So I’m not giving out any gold stars, but I’m grateful for this accomplishment and for all the people who came together to make it so.”
Perhaps the biggest sticking point was World Cup prize money, which is based on how far a team advances in the tournament. While the U.S. women have been successful on the international stage with back-to-back World Cup titles, differences in FIFA prize money meant they took home far less than the men’s winners. American women received a $110,000 bonus for winning the 2019 World Cup; the U.S. men would have received $407,000 had they won in 2018.

The unions agreed to pool FIFA’s payments for the men’s World Cup later this year and next year’s Women’s World Cup, as well as for the 2026 and 2027 tournaments.






Each player will get matching game appearance fees in what the USSF said makes it the first federation to pool FIFA prize money in this manner.
“We saw it as an opportunity, an opportunity to be leaders in this front and join in with the women’s side and U.S. Soccer. So we’re just excited that this is how we were able to get the deal done,” said Walker Zimmerman, a defender who is part of the U.S. National Team Players Association leadership group.
Women’s union projections have compensation for a player who has been under contract to increase 34% from 2018 to this year, from $245,000 to $327,000. The 2023-28 average annual pay would be $450,000 for a player making all rosters, with the possibility of doubling the figure in World Cup years depending on results.

The federation previously based bonuses on payments from FIFA, which earmarked $400 million for the 2018 men’s tournament, including $38 million to champion France, and $30 million for the 2019 women’s tournament, including $4 million to the champion United States.


FIFA has increased the total to $440 million for the 2022 men’s World Cup, and its president, Gianni Infantino, has proposed that FIFA double the women’s prize money to $60 million for the 2023 Women’s World Cup, in which FIFA has increased the teams to 32.
For the current World Cup cycles, the USSF will pool the FIFA funds, taking 10% off the top and then splitting the rest equally among 46 players — 23 players on the roster of each team. For the 2026-27 cycle, the USSF cut increases to 20% before the split.

After missing the 2018 World Cup, the men qualified for this year's World Cup in Qatar starting in November. The women's team will seek to qualify this year for the 2023 World Cup, cohosted by Australia and New Zealand.
Among the details:
— For lesser tournaments, such as those run by the governing body of North America, players will earn identical game bonuses.






— For exhibition games, players will receive matching appearance fees and performance payments based on the match result and opponent rank. Players who don’t dress will earn a fee that is the equivalent of participating in a national team training camp.
— Women gave up guaranteed base salaries that had been part of their CBA since 2005. Some players had been guaranteed annual salaries of $100,000.

“I think we’ve outgrown some of the conditions that may look like we have lost something, but now our (professional) league is actually strong enough where now we don’t need as many guaranteed contracts, you know, we can be on more of a pay-to-play model,” Purce said.
— Child care, covered for women for more than 25 years, will be extended to men during national team training camps and matches.
— The women and men also will receive a portion of commercial revenue from tickets for matches controlled by the USSF, with bonuses for sellouts, and each team will get a portion of broadcast, partner and sponsor revenue.






— Players will get a 401(k) plan and the USSF will match up to 5% of a player’s compensation, subject to IRS limits. That money will be deducted from the shares of commercial revenue.

“There were moments when I thought it was all going to fall apart and then it came back together and it’s a real credit to all the different groups coming together, negotiating at one table,” said federation President Cindy Parlow Cone, a former national team player who became head of the governing body in 2020. “I think that’s where the turning point really happened. Before, trying to negotiate a CBA with the women and then turn around and negotiate CBA terms with the men and vice versa was really challenging. I think the real turning point was when we finally were all in the same room sitting at the same table, working together and collaborating to reach this goal.”
Women ended six years of litigation over equal pay in February in a deal calling for the USSF to pay $24 million, a deal contingent on reaching new collective bargaining agreements.


As part of the settlement, players will split $22 million, about one-third of what they had sought in damages. The USSF also agreed to establish a fund with $2 million to benefit the players in their post-soccer careers and charitable efforts aimed at growing the sport for women.

Mark Levinstein, counsel for the men’s union, said the agreement ended “more than 20 years of federation discrimination against the USWNT players.”
“Together with the USWNTPA, the USMNT players achieved what everyone said was impossible — an agreement that provides fair compensation to the USMNT players and equal pay and equal working conditions to the USWNT players,” he said. “The new federation leadership should get tremendous credit for working with the players to achieve these agreements.”

 
Mar 11, 2020
18,519
16,037
113
So many thoughts on this: they would have crushed it financially when they were great but now pay will be based of rankings and results and we haven't been the big dog for years, and their doesn't seem to be the next Golden generation coming.

They gave up their base foe performance based pay, love that as a competitor, now you gotta perform.


Men get maternity leave, my wife is currently pregnant with our first child and my company gives me 10 weeks paid maternity leave which has to be taken in minimum 2 week increments. I plan on taking the first month of 4-5 weeks and then go back for a month and then take 2 weeks off to give her a break right about the time she is exhausted. Sounds great in corporate America, as someone who was part of our ODP.program if you take that much time out of camp your ass is never gonna see the field. The coach has to build a team and if you are not there the game plan can't involve you. Sometimes the greatest ability is availability.


32 female teams in the WCC means there are going to be some dog shit teams in the tournament, betting will be insane.
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
45,772
37,130
113
39
Hoosier is just salty over some women getting a pay raise.

I'm salty because the men have to give up money that they legitimately earned because people overseas actually watch the men's teams play to subsidize the women's team that generally speaking isn't watched overseas.

And the team that loses to 15 year old boys thinks their play is somehow comparable to the men's play.
 
Mar 11, 2020
18,519
16,037
113
Is this self supporting?
No. Without the men's money the females wouldn't have anywhere near this pool of money. The hard truth is, the rear of the world isn't anywhere near as woke as us and doesn't pretend to give a shit about woman's athletics. For us however, it should but the pressure on the players to get back to winning, or they are going to be really broke.
 

dgordo

HR Legend
Gold Member
Nov 15, 2001
24,919
34,158
113
Chicago
No but equal pay should either be based on equal ability to play or equal ability to bring in earnings. The women have neither.

Serena Williams probably out earns most men's tennis players. . . think she's gonna be sharing her winnings?

that doesnt make any sense, this union that agreed to these terms. All members decided they should be paid the same. they didnt want pay to be based upon any of the factors you want.
 

hawkeye54545

HR Legend
Gold Member
Apr 25, 2005
20,811
30,546
113
Not a soccer fan but my thought it is soccer may be the one sport where the national teams are at least close to equal in popularity. Maybe Tennis?

Obviously, this doesn't mean WNBA or women's golfers will be bringing in the same as their male counterparts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JupiterHawk

JupiterHawk

HR Legend
Jan 6, 2005
15,065
21,094
113
Jupiter, FL
Not a soccer fan but my thought it is soccer may be the one sport where the national teams are at least close to equal in popularity. Maybe Tennis?

Obviously, this doesn't mean WNBA or women's golfers will be bringing in the same as their male counterparts.

Yeah was thinking the same as the tv ratings have been very good for the US Women's team.

US viewership of the 2019 Women’s World Cup final was 22% higher than the 2018 men’s final​


 

SI_NYC

HR MVP
Dec 15, 2001
1,447
2,245
113
I'm salty because the men have to give up money that they legitimately earned because people overseas actually watch the men's teams play to subsidize the women's team that generally speaking isn't watched overseas.

And the team that loses to 15 year old boys thinks their play is somehow comparable to the men's play.
I thought I read that the women do out earn the men in revenue from ticket sales.
 

Dr. Spaceman

HR All-American
Jun 22, 2009
4,471
9,107
113
I'm salty because the men have to give up money that they legitimately earned because people overseas actually watch the men's teams play to subsidize the women's team that generally speaking isn't watched overseas.

And the team that loses to 15 year old boys thinks their play is somehow comparable to the men's play.
Maybe look inward and think about why this bothers you so much
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
45,772
37,130
113
39
I thought I read that the women do out earn the men in revenue from ticket sales.

That may be true, it may also depend on where they are in their cycle. A women's world cup qualifying match probably out earns a men's friendly match.

The problem is that the women's world cup because it doesn't draw a large viewership outside of the United States earns pennies on the dollar to what the men's world cup earns. So when FIFA distributes the money from each World Cup to each national federation the money coming in to US soccer from the men's world cup is far far more than that from the women's world cup.

Previously US soccer gave each team an equal percentage of their respective world cup earnings. Hence the men got more money from that.

Now they are pooling both world cups just so they can inflate the women's earnings.

Oddly enough if they had done that in 2018 the men would have been taking pay away from the women and the women would have screamed about it. But now since the men have qualified for 2022 and because they are hosts for 2026 AND the world cup is expanding anyways and they are pretty much guaranteed easy qualification from now on, the men will be forever subsidizing the women's team.
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
45,772
37,130
113
39
Maybe look inward and think about why this bothers you so much

Some reason it would bother me if a bunch of men's tennis players started demanding that Serena Williams share the money she's earning.

Pay in athletics is dependent upon viewership.
 
Mar 11, 2020
18,519
16,037
113
Yeah was thinking the same as the tv ratings have been very good for the US Women's team.

US viewership of the 2019 Women’s World Cup final was 22% higher than the 2018 men’s final​





And to the ladies credit we played in that game compared to our men not even playing in the men's tournament.
 

ThorneStockton

HR Legend
Oct 2, 2009
24,334
34,151
113
Some reason it would bother me if a bunch of men's tennis players started demanding that Serena Williams share the money she's earning.

Pay in athletics is dependent upon viewership.

How do NFL teams split the viewership pay among the offense, defense and special teams? Then after that split how do they split it among the 11 players?
 

Dr. Spaceman

HR All-American
Jun 22, 2009
4,471
9,107
113
Some reason it would bother me if a bunch of men's tennis players started demanding that Serena Williams share the money she's earning.

Pay in athletics is dependent upon viewership.
Why are you comparing the decision from the US Soccer Federation with tennis players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gohawks50

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
45,772
37,130
113
39
How do NFL teams split the viewership pay among the offense, defense and special teams? Then after that split how do they split it among the 11 players?

The teams individually pay the players based upon who they think will help them win more. Also ends up co-inciting with how popular players are too.

kickers and punters make very little in comparison to quarterbacks and pass rushers.
 

ThorneStockton

HR Legend
Oct 2, 2009
24,334
34,151
113
The teams individually pay the players based upon who they think will help them win more. Also ends up co-inciting with how popular players are too.

kickers and punters make very little in comparison to quarterbacks and pass rushers.

Does that upset you that they don't pay based on viewership?
 

dgordo

HR Legend
Gold Member
Nov 15, 2001
24,919
34,158
113
Chicago
Some reason it would bother me if a bunch of men's tennis players started demanding that Serena Williams share the money she's earning.

Pay in athletics is dependent upon viewership.

Male tennis players make way more from tournament winnings than females.
 

Hoosierhawkeye

HR Legend
Sep 16, 2008
45,772
37,130
113
39
Does that upset you that they don't pay based on viewership?

No because it's impossible to separate them because they are in the same game.

Men's and women's teams play in different games. You can clearly tell who is getting more viewership.

And the women may get about the same if not a little more in the US. But they don't when they play in the world cup and the whole world is watching the men's game.
 

gohawks50

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Dec 28, 2010
8,450
14,132
113
I don't know every single tournament but the US open pays them equally.

Outside of the Grand Slam events, The New York Times reports that the annual prize money for the top 100 earners in the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) is roughly 80 cents to every dollar earned by the top 100 men in the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP). And at some ATP and WTA tournaments, where men’s and women’s matches are sold under the same ticket, the pay disparity is even greater. At the 2015 Western & Southern Open in Ohio, Serena Williams was paid $495,000 for winning the women’s tournament title while Roger Federer was paid $731,000.

 

ThorneStockton

HR Legend
Oct 2, 2009
24,334
34,151
113
No because it's impossible to separate them because they are in the same game.

Men's and women's teams play in different games. You can clearly tell who is getting more viewership.

And the women may get about the same if not a little more in the US. But they don't when they play in the world cup and the whole world is watching the men's game.

Does it bother you that the NFL shares the national revenue equally among the teams even though they don't have equal viewership? They also play in different games, you can tell who is getting more viewership.

The Big Ten also shares their revenue equally among the conference teams rather than basing it on viewership, does that bother you? Who gets more viewership Michigan or Rutgers?
 

dgordo

HR Legend
Gold Member
Nov 15, 2001
24,919
34,158
113
Chicago
Does it bother you that the NFL shares the national revenue equally among the teams even though they don't have equal viewership? They also play in different games, you can tell who is getting more viewership.

The Big Ten also shares their revenue equally among the conference teams rather than basing it on viewership, does that bother you? Who gets more viewership Michigan or Rutgers?

The Big ten also shares revenue among mens and womens teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThorneStockton

BelemNole

HR Legend
Mar 29, 2002
30,937
63,611
113
I'm salty because the men have to give up money that they legitimately earned because people overseas actually watch the men's teams play to subsidize the women's team that generally speaking isn't watched overseas.

And the team that loses to 15 year old boys thinks their play is somehow comparable to the men's play.
Says the great defender of women's sports from the half dozen trans girls out there playing
 
  • Like
Reactions: gohawks50

West Duval Nole

HR Heisman
Dec 16, 2013
5,869
6,697
113
Jacksonville
I'm salty because the men have to give up money that they legitimately earned because people overseas actually watch the men's teams play to subsidize the women's team that generally speaking isn't watched overseas.

And the team that loses to 15 year old boys thinks their play is somehow comparable to the men's play.
No need to be salty about it. Sounds to me like the men agreed to this.

Many men's sports subsidize women's sports and other non revenue producing sports.