Women's Team Complaint

[Unregistered]

The US should definitely pay & treat both genders of national teams equitably!

Fixed it for you

[Unregistered]

I have a feeling that this is going to be a tough one to figure out. If they were middle managers at a local bank that would be difficult to treat differently based on gender. In this case it's an entertainment business that generates different streams of revenue and requires different investment. An equitable compensation arrangement would probably come down to the same base and benefits with equal incentives based on both success and revenue.

Irregardless, the current set up is not fair and the employer should probably make great strides to settle this.

[Unregistered]

I have a feeling that this is going to be a tough one to figure out. If they were middle managers at a local bank that would be difficult to treat differently based on gender. In this case it's an entertainment business that generates different streams of revenue and requires different investment. An equitable compensation arrangement would probably come down to the same base and benefits with equal incentives based on both success and revenue.

Irregardless, the current set up is not fair and the employer should probably make great strides to settle this.

Which means they wouldn't be paid the same necessarily but would be equal opportunity.

[Unregistered]

I don't mean to be a negative nellie, but wouldn't that disparity be because of the matching disparity in the popularity of women's soccer?
Less than one fourth of the number of people go to women's soccer games as go to men's soccer games, therefore there is less than a fourth of the ticket sales income to pay the women players. Based on that, it would seem that they are lucky to be paid a fourth of the men's program.

From a Professional stand point you are correct. From the perspective of representing the US National team it's a different matter. The suit strictly focuses on their treatment as US Natinal team members. It's hard to argue the disparity in pay between the US men's and women's team when the women have hall the success, but not the commensurate reward.

[Unregistered]

From a Professional stand point you are correct. From the perspective of representing the US National team it's a different matter. The suit strictly focuses on their treatment as US Natinal team members. It's hard to argue the disparity in pay between the US men's and women's team when the women have hall the success, but not the commensurate reward.

Except they haven't had all the success. Winning in the 3rd division is not the same as winning in the 1st division. While the women are the best team in the world in their division, it's just not nearly as competitive as the men's.

As for equal pay for representing the country, that argument could be spread across all sports where athletes represent their country. Shouldn't a US fencer, or curler be compensated the same as a US soccer player? Where would all that money come from? There's certainly no TV contract for fencing.

[Unregistered]

Except they haven't had all the success. Winning in the 3rd division is not the same as winning in the 1st division. While the women are the best team in the world in their division, it's just not nearly as competitive as the men's.

As for equal pay for representing the country, that argument could be spread across all sports where athletes represent their country. Shouldn't a US fencer, or curler be compensated the same as a US soccer player? Where would all that money come from? There's certainly no TV contract for fencing.

Different sports = different revenues so it's tough to justify that comparison. The more relevant data point is are both genders paid the same to represent their country in the same sport? Skiing? Tennis? Fencing?

[Unregistered]

Except they haven't had all the success. Winning in the 3rd division is not the same as winning in the 1st division. While the women are the best team in the world in their division, it's just not nearly as competitive as the men's.

As for equal pay for representing the country, that argument could be spread across all sports where athletes represent their country. Shouldn't a US fencer, or curler be compensated the same as a US soccer player? Where would all that money come from? There's certainly no TV contract for fencing.

What are you talking about? In my My post that you answered, I clearly state that in the professional leagues there is absolutely no argument. The men's game is more popular and generates greater revenue.

When it's about the US NATIONAL TEAM, representing the USA, the disparity in compensation cannot be justified. The women's NATIONAL TEAM have had unquestionably far better success than the men's, but aren't compensated equally, and I would even submit, greater than the men's, because of their successes.

Also, this isn't about cross sports compensation. Men and women fencing teams, curling teams or whatever should be equally compensated within their OWN sport. Should a female US NATIONAL TEAM fencer or curler be paid equally as a US NATIONAL TEAM soccer player? Of course not. It's apples and oranges in terms of popularity, physical demands, revenue etc.

[Unregistered]

What are you talking about? In my My post that you answered, I clearly state that in the professional leagues there is absolutely no argument. The men's game is more popular and generates greater revenue.

When it's about the US NATIONAL TEAM, representing the USA, the disparity in compensation cannot be justified. The women's NATIONAL TEAM have had unquestionably far better success than the men's, but aren't compensated equally, and I would even submit, greater than the men's, because of their successes.

Also, this isn't about cross sports compensation. Men and women fencing teams, curling teams or whatever should be equally compensated within their OWN sport. Should a female US NATIONAL TEAM fencer or curler be paid equally as a US NATIONAL TEAM soccer player? Of course not. It's apples and oranges in terms of popularity, physical demands, revenue etc.

The players should also be paid the same base salary and then a bonus based on US Soccer's earning in each gender. Share the success and failures. That is fair. Frankly the women's game is boring as hell but they should get paid if they are bringing in revenue.

[Unregistered]

The women should get paid the same as the men if, and only if, they are good enough to play with the men. As none of them are that good, they shouldn't be paid as much. Two people, a man and a woman, doing exactly the same job in a company somewhere (ie. 2 design engineers), with the same experience and performance, should be paid the same. But that's not what we have with the USNT soccer players. The women are NOT doing the same job as the men. The women do not have high enough performance to play on the men's team meanwhile the men, if allowed, could take all of the spots on the women's team quite easily.

[Unregistered]

What are you talking about? In my My post that you answered, I clearly state that in the professional leagues there is absolutely no argument. The men's game is more popular and generates greater revenue.

When it's about the US NATIONAL TEAM, representing the USA, the disparity in compensation cannot be justified. The women's NATIONAL TEAM have had unquestionably far better success than the men's, but aren't compensated equally, and I would even submit, greater than the men's, because of their successes.

Also, this isn't about cross sports compensation. Men and women fencing teams, curling teams or whatever should be equally compensated within their OWN sport. Should a female US NATIONAL TEAM fencer or curler be paid equally as a US NATIONAL TEAM soccer player? Of course not. It's apples and oranges in terms of popularity, physical demands, revenue etc.

So then the men's and women's basketball teams should be paid the same?

[Unregistered]

What are you talking about? In my My post that you answered, I clearly state that in the professional leagues there is absolutely no argument. The men's game is more popular and generates greater revenue.

When it's about the US NATIONAL TEAM, representing the USA, the disparity in compensation cannot be justified. The women's NATIONAL TEAM have had unquestionably far better success than the men's, but aren't compensated equally, and I would even submit, greater than the men's, because of their successes.

Also, this isn't about cross sports compensation. Men and women fencing teams, curling teams or whatever should be equally compensated within their OWN sport. Should a female US NATIONAL TEAM fencer or curler be paid equally as a US NATIONAL TEAM soccer player? Of course not. It's apples and oranges in terms of popularity, physical demands, revenue etc.

You just agreed with me that it's the apples and oranges of popularity, physical demands, revenue, etc. that justify the men getting paid more than the women. The men's game is significantly more popular, more demanding as more countries produce high quality mens players than they do on the women's side, and the men's revenues are much higher overall. These numbers are available from a number of sources.

Also, you can't argue that athletes competing in different events should be paid the same regardless of popularity and revenue while at the same time argue other athletes competing in less popular events with lower revenues should be paid less.

[Unregistered]

Should the women receive the same scorn and punishment as the men get when they have a DUI? Just wondering.

[Unregistered]

You just agreed with me that it's the apples and oranges of popularity, physical demands, revenue, etc. that justify the men getting paid more than the women. The men's game is significantly more popular, more demanding as more countries produce high quality mens players than they do on the women's side, and the men's revenues are much higher overall. These numbers are available from a number of sources.

Also, you can't argue that athletes competing in different events should be paid the same regardless of popularity and revenue while at the same time argue other athletes competing in less popular events with lower revenues should be paid less.

Anyone on any US team should not be paid. There's plenty of endorsement money if they're that good. It's a choice by the athlete to take the time to compete for the US.

[Unregistered]

You just agreed with me that it's the apples and oranges of popularity, physical demands, revenue, etc. that justify the men getting paid more than the women. The men's game is significantly more popular, more demanding as more countries produce high quality mens players than they do on the women's side, and the men's revenues are much higher overall. These numbers are available from a number of sources.

Also, you can't argue that athletes competing in different events should be paid the same regardless of popularity and revenue while at the same time argue other athletes competing in less popular events with lower revenues should be paid less.

Perhaps, you should read the assertions being made. The USWNT generates more revenue than the men's. The men are paid a flat fee for a friendly game, win or lose ( I think it's about $5,000). The women however get paid more if they win and less if they lose in a friendly and when they do win, it's only about $1300. My numbers may be off, but the gist is that the women get shirt changed.

How does US Soccer justify that? And people,
I am not talking about professional leagues. I am keenly aware that men's professional soccer generates more revenue, is more popular etc etc.

[Unregistered]

Men are better than women at sports. And pay correlates. Not rocket science. Let's use our brains and move on.