USWNT, US Soccer Ties Part of Tie; equal pay still unresolved

The players of the United States Women’s National Team have agreed to terms of settlement for the portion of the lawsuit against the American Football Federation relating to the allegations of unequal working conditions.

– USWNT players show support for BLM ahead of game
– Hays: USWNT Mews making the most of turbulent 2020

The settlement agreement announced on Tuesday avoids an imminent trial over these claims relating to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but does not end the lawsuit originally filed in March 2019. The plaintiffs reiterated on Tuesday that they had the intention to appeal complaints of wage discrimination under Equal. Compensation Act.

A California Federal District Court judge issued summary judgment to US Soccer on the allegations in May, ruling against Carli Lloyd, Alex Morgan, Megan Rapinoe and Becky Sauerbrunn, acting as class representatives for all players who have sued. The working conditions allegations implicated in Tuesday’s settlement alleged discrimination in the areas of staffing and travel, particularly differences between the male and female national teams in the use of charter flights and guest rooms. ‘hotel.

Full terms of the settlement have not been released, but several sources have described to ESPN assurances of equality now and a new collective agreement.

Under the proposed settlement, which has yet to be approved by Judge R. Gary Klausner, US Soccer agrees to provide an equal number of charter flights, as well as comparable hotel accommodations.

US Soccer will also enact a new “Professional Support Policy for Senior National Teams” which aims to ensure equal staffing while allowing each national team to adapt to its specific needs. Each team will have between 18 and 21 “professional positions” for staff.

In addition, under a site selection policy included in the regulations, the federation “will seek to provide fair sites and playing surfaces” for national teams.

While allegations of wage discrimination widely seen as the centerpiece of the lawsuit remain in dispute, the working conditions regulations represent a breakthrough in a way. There has rarely been much evidence of rapprochement between the two parties. This spring’s filings by US Soccer that denigrated female players as less than their male counterparts are indicative of the grudge. The language of these filings sparked objections from supporters and sponsors and led to the resignation of former US football president Carlos Cordeiro.

“This is an important and welcome time for players in US Soccer and the Women’s National Team,” incoming US Soccer president Cindy Parlow Cone said of the settlement in a statement. “Earlier this year, I took on the role of chairman, and shortly after, we hired Will Wilson as our new CEO. We, and the rest of the US Soccer leadership team, are focused on taking a new management approach to the Federation. everything counts.

“I believe our approach helped us make this deal and demonstrates the commitment of the new leadership of US Soccer to find a new way forward with the USWNT. This rule is good news for everyone and I believes it will serve as a springboard for continued progress. “

But the players made it clear on Tuesday that while a settlement is a positive step, it is mostly positive in their eyes as it allows them to focus on allegations of wage discrimination. The plaintiffs were unable to move forward with an appeal relating to these claims until the working conditions claims were resolved by settlement or lawsuit.

“We are pleased that the USWNT players fought – and achieved – a long overdue level playing field,” said Molly Levinson, player spokesperson. “We now intend to appeal the court ruling which ignores the central fact in this case that female players were paid at lower rates than men doing the same job.

“We remain as committed as ever to our work to achieve the equal pay we legally deserve.” We are focused on the future and making sure we leave the game a better place for the next generation of women who will play for this team and this country. . “

The working conditions regulation does not indicate that the two sides are any closer to resolving their long-standing pay disputes.

In his statement on Tuesday, Parlow Cone reiterated “the federation’s standing offer to discuss contract options.” In a March letter, Cordeiro put forward a proposal that US Soccer said would pay the men’s and women’s national teams using the same pay structure.

The problem is FIFA’s cash prize, with female players arguing that they deserve the same prize for winning the World Cup, for example, that male players would receive for winning this tournament. US Soccer argues that given the differences in the prize money allocated by FIFA for the men’s and women’s events, this would cause financial harm to the federation.

An appeal could be a long process, almost certainly going beyond the Olympics postponed next summer and the expiration of the collective agreement between US Soccer and the US Women’s National Team Players Association. The union representing the players of the national team is not a party to the lawsuit.

France received $ 38 million for winning the 2018 Men’s World Cup. The United States received $ 4 million for winning the 2019 Women’s World Cup.

“We all know it’s not possible from an American football point of view to compensate for that,” Parlow Cone said. “Even before COVID, it would be devastating for our budget, for our programming. But given COVID, not to be too dramatic, but it would probably bankrupt the federation.”

A former World Cup winner with the United States as a player, Parlow Cone went on to say that she “would love to partner with the women’s team and help push FIFA to not only tie the prizes in the World Cup, but also to equalize their investment in the game at all levels. “

The men’s and women’s national teams operate under separate collective agreements. In ruling in favor of US Soccer over allegations of wage discrimination in May, Klausner said members of the women’s team have voluntarily ceded some earning potential in their collective agreement in exchange for greater security and additional benefits.