U.S. Soccer president Sunil Gulati argued that the U.S. women do not generate as much revenue as the U.S. mens team over a four-year World Cup cyclea federation spokesperson said the men have generated nearly twice as much revenue as the women during that timeand Gulati added that revenue generation should be taken into account in the mens and womens collective bargaining agreements with U.S. Soccer.
My specific question to Gulati was: Do you think the U.S. women deserve to be paid equally to the U.S. men by U.S. Soccer, and if not, why not?
I dont want to use the word deserve in any of this, Gulati said. Id reverse the question: Do you think revenue should matter at all in determination of compensation in a market economy? If we look at the track record of teams, a lot of different things go into the compensation for the players
Part of it is based on revenue, part of it is based on revenues that accrue from international competitions, part of it is based on incentives and the performance of the teams. All of that goes into it. We think very highly of the womens national team, we want to compensate them fairly and well sit down and work through that with them.
As for revenue generation, Gulati added: It is absolutely part of the equation, sure. And from everything Ive heard with the players, they agree with that.
U.S. womens player lawyer Jeffrey Kessler had told SI.com that the timing of the womens action was due to U.S. Soccer communicating in CBA negotiations that the women would not get as much as the men in their new CBA. U.S. Soccer lawyer Russell Sauer denied that claim. I can tell you categorically along with the other U.S. Soccer participants that statement or anything even remotely along those lines was never said, argued Sauer, who said he has been at all three meetings in November, February and March.
Sauer reiterated U.S. Soccers position that the womens CBA is in place until December 31, 2016, based on the memorandum of understanding signed in 2013. The U.S. players maintain the CBA is no longer in place. A court in Chicago is expected to rule on the existence of the CBA in early June.
A U.S. Soccer spokesperson disputed the revenue figures presented in the U.S. players complaint. During the last four years, the mens revenues have been significantly higher than the womens national team, the spokesperson said. The numbers provided in the complaint at times are inaccurate, misleading or both. And looking at a single year doesnt provide the entire picture. If you look at four or eight years cumulatively, the mens national team revenues are almost twice that of the womens national team.
The spokesperson added that U.S. Soccer has invested approximately $10 million in the NWSL in the last three-plus years; that from 2011 to 15 the U.S. men had an average home attendance of 29,781 to 16,229 for the women; and that the big difference in bonuses for the mens and womens World Cups is based largely on the difference in prize money awarded by FIFA.
Asked if he could specify how much of U.S. Soccers sponsorship and TV income could be credited to the U.S. women and how much to the men, Gulati said: The sponsorship and TV money are done collectively. We dont break that down either with any of our partners or our TV partners. So thats on a guaranteed basis. We dont break that down in any of our accounting. Gulati did say that TV ratings are substantially higher for the men than the women right now. Its not 10 or 20 or 30 or 50 percent higher, its a multiple right now on the mens program versus the womens program, Gulati said.
Gulati finished by saying he was confident of getting a new CBA done with the players for the start of 2017. I have no doubt that we will get a deal done and well get back to focusing on the game, he said. Well get a deal done thats fair to the players that will involve a process of give and take. Weve got a team that were very proud of. Were committed to many of the issues theyve raised, and well figure out a way to get to those points with them.
