HIt has only been seven months since the US women soccer team members appeared to be the sure winners. Because a 78-year-old man with white hair and a black dress gave them an encouraging interim report. Yes, Federal Judge R. Gary Klausner: Women will win less per match than men when they play in the US national jersey.
No wonder the players responded so emphatically. Because in their trial before the Federal District Court in Los Angeles, the first in American legal history, in which a team of successful athletes pulled all legal records in the struggle for equality, they had pinpointed that argument. And on their athletic success and the income they generate for the association.
Accordingly, the conclusion was that the different treatment of the national teams for women and men is a case of discrimination and thus a clear violation of the law. Not at all, Klausner said Friday when Jawhar rejected the players ’claims in a partial referee. The class action doesn’t even require another thorough examination in the context of a hearing of evidence in a major trial with twelve customary jurors in the United States.
Reason? Players were once offered the same terms of a collective agreement as the men in their negotiations with the NFL. Their payout is based on the entry and success bonus system. However, they would have declined this payment and agreed instead to a different method based on fixed salaries. Notabene were unable to file a complaint afterwards regarding the association’s hard-line stance. calendar? The woman’s $ 66 million compensation claim was canceled.
Klausner, who has long been suspected of favoring the employer side in labor law disputes, and his official legal argument may not be the last word. A spokeswoman said the soccer players responded with “shock and disappointment” to the news. But they don’t want to give up. Team captain Megan Rapinoe, who is the eloquent and eloquent figure of the social and political concerns of women professionals around the world, promised on Twitter: “We will never stop fighting for equal treatment.”
Which may mean that when the aspects of controversy that remain open about the difference in the type of sponsorship and support for the women’s national team are dealt with, the players will resume. Another solution can be envisaged: for the association to reach an out-of-court settlement with the women and thus end the conflict.
The players, who scored as high as the men in the major matches, filed a lawsuit in May 2019. Then they went to France, where they won the World Championship for the second time in a row. On their return they were celebrated enthusiastically in New York with a scrapbook review. Fans drowned in a speech by League President Carlos Cordero demanding equal pay. The employee was conciliatory. Its board of directors will “behave properly.” Because: “All athletes deserve fair and equal treatment.”
The seriousness of this statement became apparent in March when American football lawyers pulled an old argument from their pockets during the initial proceedings. Women are physically weaker and work slower. In other words: the principle of equality should not be applied, as advised by law, at all. The discontent was swift and widespread. Even the association’s well-known sponsors have spoken. The law firm is closed. Cordero resigned in the face of the storm of protests. Since then, a woman has taken on responsibility for the first time in union history: Vice President Cindy Barlow Kuhn, a former national player.
In addition, it became apparent that asymmetric treatment had a clear method. Nowhere is this more evident than the salaries of the national team coaches. Jill Ellis, who won two world championships with her team in 2015 and 2019 and made her departure last summer, has only received a quarter of what men’s coaches like Jürgen Klinsmann and Bruce Arena get each year. Their balance sheet was a business failure of the association. The men were eliminated from the 2018 World Cup qualifiers in Russia, causing the organization to lose millions of dollars in premium income.