View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Mr Miyagi
Joined: 14 Sep 2018
|
Post subject: Pay Dispute | |
|
How much are the AFLW players asking for? |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
Post subject: | |
|
"The new CBA covers the 2020, 2021 and 2022 season. The AFLPA will meet with the players to determine why they did not support the deal. They will then negotiate with the AFL.
The current offer was for the 2020 season to have eight home-and-away games and three finals games, with 2021 extending to nine and three and 2022 to 10 and three. The 2019 season had seven rounds with two weeks of finals despite an expanded competition.
Players opposed to the more recent CBA offer wanted a 13-round home-and-away season, which would see all 14 teams play each other once. These players have expressed concern at how they are being represented by the union.
...
Pay will be boosted by 21 per cent next season and then seven per cent in 2021 and 16 per cent in 2022, however this was already agreed in the last CBA."
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/aflw-players-to-go-back-to-negotiating-table-as-cba-fails-to-pass-20191006-p52y26.html |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
|
|
|
|
shawthing
Joined: 04 Jul 2019 Location: Victoria Park
|
Post subject: | |
|
This will absolutely screw us. In the long-term those teams that don't have an AFLW team will be thanking their lucky stars. As the women seek equal pay (think tennis) but have almost zero income (free gates), these teams will become a massive drag on clubs and hinder their ability to develop top level men's teams.
It's all a sick joke really since there'd be no more than about 20 truly gifted female football players at the moment. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
I can’t see how it will affect us. Most of the money we generate is given to the likes of Footscray and Brisbane. I reckon it’d be a nice change to be able to throw it away on some Collingwood activities instead of paying for other teams to bid for our players and pay our former players with our money. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
Post subject: | |
|
Joint CBA wouldn't take away from male players, says AFLPA
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/joint-cba-wouldn-t-take-away-from-male-players-says-aflpa-20200213-p540na.html
'However, he tried to play down suggestions that male players may have to give up future earnings, if a new broadcast deal did not increase dramatically, so AFLW players could be fairly rewarded.
He said it was a matter for the AFL to invest in AFLW rather than trying to pay the men less so the women could be paid more.
"There's got to be a conversation around the women's competition and running it properly and the industry needs to look after it properly," Marsh said.
"It's not about the industry pushing this problem to the male players and saying, 'You pay for the women'. We've got to be better than that."
...
Under the AFLW CBA, clubs pay female players $576,000 in 2020 with payments for individuals ranging from a minimum base of approximately $16,000 for 16 of the 30 listed players, to a high of close to $30,000 for two players per club this season. By 2022 the lowest paid players will receive $20,000 and the highest $37,000.' |
|
|
|
|
|