World champion U.S. women's soccer players sue federation for gender discrimination

[rooster59]

World champion U.S. women's soccer players sue federation for gender discrimination

By Frank Pingue

 

Mar 5, 2019; Tampa, FL, USA; United States forward Tobin Heath (17) and forward Alex Morgan (13) and forward Mallory Pugh (11) celebrate after a goal during the first half against Brazil during a She Believes Cup women's soccer match at Raymond James Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Douglas DeFelice-USA TODAY Sports

 

(Reuters) - The U.S. women's national soccer team sued the U.S. Soccer Federation on Friday with allegations of gender discrimination just three months before they open their World Cup title defence in France.

 

All 28 members of the United States squad were named as plaintiffs in federal court in Los Angeles on International Women's Day and the lawsuit includes complaints about wages and nearly every other aspect of their working conditions.

 

The players, a group that includes stars Megan Rapinoe, Carli Lloyd and Alex Morgan, said they have been consistently paid less money than their male counterparts even though their performance has been superior to the men's team.

 

"Each of us is extremely proud to wear the United States jersey, and we also take seriously the responsibility that comes with that," U.S. co-captain Morgan said in a statement.

 

"We believe that fighting for gender equality in sports is a part of that responsibility. As players, we deserved to be paid equally for our work, regardless of our gender."

 

According to the lawsuit, filed three years after several players made a similar complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, U.S. soccer has "utterly failed to promote gender equality."

 

The U.S. Soccer Federation did not respond when asked to comment on the lawsuit.

 

The players said that U.S. Soccer President Carlos Cordeiro previously admitted the women's team should be valued as much as the men's squad but the federation "has paid only lip service to gender equality."

 

The lawsuit outlines years of institutionalized gender discrimination, claiming travel conditions, medical personnel, promotion of games and training are less favourable for female players compared to their male counterparts.

 

The U.S. women's team has enjoyed unparalleled success in international soccer, including three World Cup titles and four Olympic gold medals.

 

The men's team have never won either tournament and their best modern-day result at a World Cup was in 2002 when they reached the quarter-finals.

 

'IT'S A SHAME'

 

When the women's team clinched their most recent World Cup title in 2015, it was the most watched soccer game in American TV history with an audience of approximately 23 million viewers.

 

The team's success has translated into substantial revenue generation and profits for the federation, the lawsuit said.

The women earned more in profit and/or revenue than the men's national team for the period covered by the lawsuit, it said.

 

"In light of our team's unparalleled success on the field, it's a shame that we still are fighting for treatment that reflects our achievements and contributions to the sport," said U.S. co-captain Lloyd.

 

"We have made progress in narrowing the gender pay gap, however progress does not mean that we will stop working to realise our legal rights and make equality a reality for our sport."

 

Last October FIFA said it will double the total prize money for this year's World Cup in France to $30 million, with the winning team taking home $4 million. The total prize money for last year's men's World Cup in Russia was $400 million, with champions France receiving $38 million.

 

FIFA announced on Friday plans to host a global women's convention this June in Paris where it said leaders from the world of sports and politics will discuss key issues around the development and empowerment of women in soccer.

 

The U.S. players are also seeking class-action status that would allow any women who played for the team since February 2015 to join the case.

 

"We feel a responsibility not only to stand up for what we know we deserve as athletes, but also for what we know is right – on behalf of our teammates, future teammates, fellow women athletes, and women all around the world," said Rapinoe.

 

In 2017, the U.S. women's national hockey team threatened to boycott that year's world championship but returned to the ice after settling a dispute with USA Hockey over wages and better benefits in line with their male counterparts.

 

The U.S. Women's National Team Players Association (USWNTPA) said in a statement it made progress during contract negotiations with U.S. Soccer in 2017 regarding compensation and working conditions but that more work needs to be done.

 

"This lawsuit is an effort by the plaintiffs to address those serious issues through the exercise of their individual rights," the union said in a statement, adding that it would continue to seek improvements through the labour-management and collective bargaining processes.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-03-09

 

[Samui Bodoh]

"...The lawsuit outlines years of institutionalized gender discrimination, claiming travel conditions, medical personnel, promotion of games and training are less favourable for female players compared to their male counterparts.

The U.S. women's team has enjoyed unparalleled success in international soccer, including three World Cup titles and four Olympic gold medals.

The men's team have never won either tournament and their best modern-day result at a World Cup was in 2002 when they reached the quarter-finals..."

 

It is hard to argue that the current conditions are fair, and I won't even try.

 

The most convincing argument to me was a tournament held a few years ago (don't remember which one) in which the male teams played on grass and the women played on AstroTurf.

 

That ain't right.

 

Give'em hell, girls!

 

 

[DoctorG]

If they can draw the same (or better) attendance/views/revenues than the men, then I wholeheartedly agree with them.

[brain150]

It's not about equality ... it's simply about money !

They also claim the right to kill people like stupid men do ... in the military.

 

The world is getting more and more insane every day.

[HLover]

4 hours ago, rooster59 said:

money than their male counterparts even though their performance has been superior to the men's team.

Amen, the men's team has been a laughing stock of rubbish for years.

[IAMHERE]

This would not be an issue if the Teams were of two different organizations. Should be a Womens Org and a Mens Org; not combined.

[Krataiboy]

I'm all for equality. Let the world-beating USA women's team take on the crap USA men's team. If they win or draw, they US Soccer Federation should give them the same wages and conditions.

 

Otherwise, butt out, girls.

 

 

 

 

[VocalNeal]

^ YES Equal pay for equal work. Not equal pay for the same job description.

[STALINGRAD]

It should be an honor to represent ones country,not a vocation.If you want to be paid become a professional in a league that has revenue to pay you based market economics.

[Ceruhe]

This again ????

[Ulic]

11 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

"...The lawsuit outlines years of institutionalized gender discrimination, claiming travel conditions, medical personnel, promotion of games and training are less favourable for female players compared to their male counterparts.

The U.S. women's team has enjoyed unparalleled success in international soccer, including three World Cup titles and four Olympic gold medals.

The men's team have never won either tournament and their best modern-day result at a World Cup was in 2002 when they reached the quarter-finals..."

 

It is hard to argue that the current conditions are fair, and I won't even try.

 

The most convincing argument to me was a tournament held a few years ago (don't remember which one) in which the male teams played on grass and the women played on AstroTurf.

 

That ain't right.

 

Give'em hell, girls!

 

 

Absolutely nothing to do with gender and everything to do with the amount of money the women's game brings in versus the men's game. I would argue the opposite. The women are paid more than the men as a percentage of the gate receipts and television/advertising/sponsorship money brought it. The women's game, while excellent is just not that appealing to the fans outside the World Cup and Olympics. That is the hard truth. Women's Lingerie football does not generate the money the NFL does, women's Rugby, doesn't generate the same level of money as the men's game. The same for Golf, Hockey, and even Tenis. That said, at the Tennis Majors the men subsidize the women so they have the same prize money. On the rest of the tennis circuit, the women's purse if much lower than the men's. At the risk of sounding sexist, female porn stars make 10-20 times what their male co-stars are paid per scene because the majority male fans are paying to watch the women, not the men.

[jesimps]

9 hours ago, DoctorG said:

If they can draw the same (or better) attendance/views/revenues than the men, then I wholeheartedly agree with them.

But they can't. I wouldn't go round the corner to watch a womans football match, unless I had a personal interest in one of the women. I certainly wouldn't go for the quality of the football they dish up. There might be more interest in womens football in the US, because Americans don't really understand football (played mainly with the feet, as opposed to American Football (handball)). They can only pay these women according to the amount of advertising and gate receipts their football brings in, which obviously isn't anywhere near what the man's game generates.

[mikebike]

So y'all who think it is about the gate revenues...

 

Toronto Maple Leafs haven't won shizzle since 1967 yet they draw more the almost every other NHL team.

 

Vegas Knights are only 2 yrs old but are contenders yet their gate sucks compared to the Leafs...

 

Should Vegas players be paid far less than the (usually) pathetic Leafs?

[HLover]

1 minute ago, mikebike said:

So y'all who think it is about the gate revenues...

 

Toronto Maple Leafs haven't won shizzle since 1967 yet they draw more the almost every other NHL team.

 

Vegas Knights are only 2 yrs old but are contenders yet their gate sucks compared to the Leafs...

 

Should Vegas players be paid far less than the (usually) pathetic Leafs?

Google translate could not understand your post.  Where do you hail from?

[sanemax]