Front Burner - A victory for equal pay in women’s soccer

Episode Date: May 20, 2022

On Wednesday, the United States Soccer Federation reached a landmark agreement that ensures the U.S. women’s and men’s national soccer teams are paid equally. The first of its kind, the deal puts an exclamation point on a wildly successful run for the U.S. women’s team, including four FIFA World Cup titles that date back to 1991 — and Olympic gold medals in 2008 and 2012. But it only came about after a hard-fought battle led by the team’s star players. Today on Front Burner, staff writer at The Athletic Stephanie Yang is here to break down how that battle played out and what the result means for women’s sport around the world.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi, I'm Jamie Poisson. For the fourth time, the United States of America are crowned champions of the world. In 2019, the U.S. women's national soccer team clinched another World Cup victory, this time in front of a packed stadium in France, where the crowd of 60,000 people broke out in this deafening chant, calling for equal pay.

Because even as the women were dominating in the sport, they still were not making as much as their male counterparts. Our women are being ripped off, let's be clear. They are performing at the highest level, winning championships, bringing in tons of revenue, and yet they're not getting fair pay. Until this Wednesday, when a landmark deal was reached between the men's and women's national team. U.S. soccer and the men's and women's national team unions announcing a historic new collective bargaining agreement. Every player, man or woman, will be paid equally.

It's the first soccer federation in the world to make this happen, and the culmination of a long, hard fight led by the players themselves. Today on FrontBurner, we're talking to the athletic Steph Young about what it took for the U.S. women's national soccer team to win this fight, what they came up against along the way, and what this could mean for women in sports, not just in the U.S., but everywhere. Hey, Steph, thanks so much for making the time today. Thanks for having me on. So tell me, why is this moment for the women's team a big deal? I think part of it is just it's the

culmination of practically a decade of work on this particular immediate issue. But also looking at it historically, there's been decades of this, you know, similar struggle from the women's national team. You hear stories from the players who were there in the early 90s when they were being established of getting hand-me-down men's uniforms and having to sew them, alter them themselves in order to make them fit. You can draw a direct line from that moment to this one. So I think it feels historic for that reason within the US. And of course, I think it's going to act as a global signal maybe to some of the other federations and some of the other teams about what they can aim for. Right. Cindy Parlow Cohn, the president of the U.S. Soccer Federation, she talked about how

she's been in this fight for over 20 years. And, you know, the 99ers team has a text stream and just the messages coming in from my teammates who started this fight, who I learned from. And it's just such a proud moment to actually be a leader in this, to be the first to do it and to work together with my staff at U.S. Soccer. Let's break down what the U.S. Soccer Federation and the players have agreed to here. What are the major changes? I think the major ones are they're moving to an identical pay structure. So it's no longer the men used to get paid per game, per camp, and the women had a guaranteed salary due to different club situations between the men's game and the women's game, which in itself was due to various historical factors where discrimination, sexism, misogyny kind of had artificially depressed the value of the women's game. So women couldn't earn a stable

living playing for their clubs while men could, but now they get the same per appearance, per win, bonuses, that sort of thing. There's shared benefits. There's shared commercial revenue, including broadcast partner and sponsor revenue, and obviously pooled World Cup prize money, which get pooled between the men's and women's World Cups and then split up among the players. And just to put some numbers on this, I wonder if you could tell me, or when it comes to actual dollars here, before this deal, how much would a hypothetical men's team be making if they had won the World Cup versus the men's pot, I believe, for the upcoming Qatar World Cup is $440 million total. The winner gets $42 million. And comparatively, the women's pot before this has been about $30 million, with the winner getting $4 million.

So in 2019, the U.S. women did win in France, and they won $4 million. in France, and they won $4 million. Whereas just for making group stage, participating in group, and then getting eliminated, a men's team would get like $8 million. So you can see how there's some discrepancy there. Wow, huge. Beyond pay, let's talk about some of the other kinds of new provisions in this deal. Childcare, for example. Yes, that's one of the shared benefits between teams. That's something that the men's national team will now have access to. shared benefits between teams. That's something that the men's national team will now have access to. It's something that the women have had for, I think, 25 years now, because as we know, societally, at least in the United States, women are expected to be the primary caretakers.

And now it's available for men as well. Everybody gets retirement funds. Eventually, there's going to be 401k matching. And some things that you might not think about, like data privacy. These players, you always see that little bump because they're wearing those little trackers that measure all their stats during training and games. And they've negotiated for things like owning that data, having privacy around it, that sort of thing. So I think there's a lot of cool things that they're all getting access to now. So with this deal, especially when it comes to things like the World Cup prize money, the men are potentially going to be walking away with a lot less than they had before here, right? So this might sound crass, but why have they agreed to this deal? Well, I think you have to listen to the players

themselves, right? Walker Zimmerman, who's a defender with the men, he spoke about this after they announced the deal. And he kept saying things about, this is the first time the men's and women's teams have sat down together. We accomplished something historic. It makes a lot more sense when you're united. He said there's there really wasn't a way forward for both of them without equalization of World Cup prize money. We looked at the numbers between the previous CBA, the CBA that we've agreed to now and recognize that, you know, sure, there was a potential chance of making less money. No doubt about it. But we also believe so much in the women's team. We believe in the whole premise of equal pay.

Partially, they also wanted to get on the same timeline for negotiations. Before, it was leapfrogging, where the men would negotiate through CBA, and then the women's CBA would expire. So then they negotiate and so on and so on. And they could kind of maybe kind of build off of each other. And now they're kind of uniting sort of as a common labor force. They still have their own players associations, but now they're negotiating on the same cycle. And if you're doing that, it's kind of important that you guys be on the same page so that you're not, you know, crossing the lines or sending mixed messages to U.S. soccer as a labor pool. Do you feel like there was also tremendous pressure for the men's team to make this deal? Maybe, but I am actually not surprised. If we go back to 2019, the lawsuit that the women's national team filed in California district court over gender discrimination. The Men's Players Association backed the women then publicly, and they said

equal division of revenue attributable to the men's and women's programs is our primary pursuit. So they just told us right there that they were looking for something similar in the equal pay area. So it's not like this is some out of the blue where they've been resisting it and resisting it. And all of a sudden they gave in. I think this is something that people have been talking about and the two teams have been talking about and trying to get some perspective together on it. So I'm not 100% surprised that the men's team cooperated or worked with the women's team on something like this. Other things. And this time we were able to negotiate for equal pay and also negotiate for those extra benefits, some of which are now also going to be available to the men, including 401k and child care.

You mentioned before that this is something that the women's team has been fighting for for decades. But I want to dig into a little bit more with you the recent history. And you mentioned that lawsuit in 2019. And so I wonder if we could just flesh out a little bit more what went on in that lawsuit and what led up to it. I think it goes back probably to maybe 2015, 2014, even before they actually filed a lawsuit. Because in 2014, then women's national team, including Abby Wambach, they filed a lawsuit against the Canadian Soccer Association. And FIFA, you guys might remember this actually as the host for the 2015 Women's World Cup.

And the U.S. women's national team filed that suit over the turf surfaces in the stadiums. They wanted grass surfaces brought in. Artificial turf is not used in the men's World Cup in soccer. And today, 40 of the top women players sued World Cup organizers for gender discrimination, saying they shouldn't be forced to play on it either. And so I think that kind of got them used to the idea more of collective action and then going through the court system. So then we come to 2016 when they file their actual federal complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and ask them to investigate. They were alleging inequality in pay and treatment, that the men's national team

got better accommodations, that there was wage discrimination. Obviously, the Federation pushes back, right? You've been sued, so you have to respond. In June of 2016, U.S. Soccer asked the EEOC to dismiss the complaint. They said, obviously, there's no evidence of discrimination based on gender. There's no violation of the law here. And they made the argument that the women's national team actually earned more than the men's national team had the year before. But here's the thing. They themselves stated that revenue tends to fluctuate year by year because soccer is obviously on a four-year cycle through the World Cups for both the men's and the women's, obviously different years for them. But that means that what might be a bumper crop for a team one year suddenly sharply declines the next year. So kind of you can pick and choose which year you want to use to compile the average take home per men's or women's national team player. per men's or women's national team player. And so you can kind of like either look at the women's best case scenario versus the men's worst case scenario. I'm not saying that's what happened

here, but it's something that you could do in order to kind of cherry pick the data. And I think there was a little bit of that, maybe from both sides of kind of massaging the numbers around to demonstrate their points. And then they basically really up the ante, right? When they sued U.S. soccer for gender discrimination. And so what happens with the lawsuit? So March 2019, they file in district court in Los Angeles. They're citing the Equal Pay Act, 1963. They're alleging U.S. soccer pays women less money for doing the same amount of work for no reason other than gender, basically saying, you know, it wasn't exactly this example, but just to put it in numbers like the men play 10 games and make $100,000, but the women have to play 20 games

to make $100,000. So on a per hour per game basis, we're getting paid less, even though the job is the same, which is to play soccer for the United States. The 2019 lawsuit alleges American female players were paid nearly $2 million in bonuses after winning the World Cup in 2015, whereas the men's team was awarded over $5 million, despite being eliminated in the round of 16. And, you know, they also talked about playing surfaces, travel conditions, how much U.S. soccer puts into promoting the games, which naturally affects how many people come to the games or how much you can sell the game for the broadcast rights and sponsorship. And again, all that, you know, if you promote the men's team by buying 100 commercials and you promote the women's team by paying for 10 commercials, then naturally one game is probably going to have higher numbers than the other, that sort of thing.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization. Empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you.

Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income? That's not a typo, 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. Judge Klausner, Gary Klausner, he's a federal judge in California. He rules in favor of U.S. soccer in 2020, saying that the players didn't demonstrate a triable issue. And so I think one of the sticking points here that he talked about was that there were two different payment structures, which we alluded to before, right? The women bargained for a payment structure that guaranteed them a salary

because at the club game, you could not earn a living for a long time. You kind of still can't now if you're not a premier player, but for the women's national team, we go back to the club game. In 2013, the first year of the National Women's Soccer League, the minimum salary was about $6,000. And the maximum salary was $30,000. But now, the NWSL just bargained for their own CBA. So yeah, the world has changed so drastically in the last 10 years. And this relates back to the new structure of pay where the women are moving to the per game basis versus guaranteed contract. But there's a reason for that structure. But Klausner is saying, well, you bargained for it that way. And so you can't come back and complain and say, well, the bargain is unfair, even though there was some legal precedent.

I think it was the National Labor Relations Board, but, you know, U.S. agency that deals with unions saying like there is precedent saying just because a union bargains for something that is kind of unfair, that doesn't mean they have to be beholden to it because it is unfair. Like you bargain for the best thing that you can get at the time, but that thing may still be unfair, but Klausner, you know, didn't buy it. It's just unacceptable that we're still fighting for equal pay. And I feel like, honestly, we've done everything you want stadiums filled. We filled them. You want role models for your kids, for your boys and your girls and your little trans kids. We have that.

You want us to be respectful. You want us to perform on the world stage. You want us to take the stars and stripes, the red, white and blue across the entire globe and represent America in the best way possible. We've done all of that. And simply, there's no reason why we're underpaid for the exception of gender. You know, one thing that I think I want to talk about when we're talking about how they got to this moment, it's also this team, right? I remember when this lawsuit was going on in 2019 and they won the World Cup. That's it. U.S. wins their fourth World Cup.

And this was like a huge moment for the movement. And what do you think that this win and this team, I'm thinking Megan Rapinoe. Rapinoe looking for the finish. And Rapinoe provides the finish. She can do no wrong. Alex Morgan. And the ESPY goes to Alex Morgan.

Specifically represented in all of this. Definitely. You can toss in Becky Sauerbrunn in there. And then obviously we've got the new young leaders who are coming up, particularly like Mitch Peirce. Three-doubling U.S. on a Mitch Peirce goal. Who I'm convinced is going to be in charge of all of us in

10 to 15 years, give or take. There's been a change and some of these players have forced the change, forced the conversation about the change, about how we place women's roles in the world in general and in sports and how we celebrate accomplishments based on gender, you know, what we find socially or culturally acceptable from men versus women, especially within the sporting context where sports are historically masculine dominated arenas. So I think that relates back to the big cultural and social change, at least here in the United States, and probably also in Canada, somewhat, can't say for you guys, but, you know, about changing perceptions of gender roles and equality and, you know,

what women do or do not deserve as human beings. Yeah. Give me an example. Give me an example of that. Well, 2019, very contentious political atmosphere in the United States. Can't imagine why. But, you know, Megan Rapinoe causes huge kerfuffle. That video comes out around the World Cup where she says, you know, they her if you win traditionally get invited to the white house would you go to the trump white house and she's like i'm not going to the white house no although that that was actually from a an event like months before and it just surfaced around the world cup but things like that um making political statements black lives matter tied in where players were taking a knee in order

to protest police brutality and racial injustice. I think in the very charged political atmosphere of the United States at that time, not that it's any less charged today, but at that time, you know, it kind of really acted as an amplifier. I imagine part of this, it's also got to be just because they're really good too, right? Like people like winners. People like winners and America in particular is obsessed with winners. We love winners and we'll forgive a lot, perhaps too much if you're a winner. Yeah, I think some of this doesn't happen, for example, in the alternate universe where the US crashes out of the 2019 World Cup in quarterfinals or something like that. But they didn't. They won. And because they won and were able to stay in the

news cycle longer due to winning and able to make flamboyant gestures on the field after scoring, it kept eyes on them more intense and for a longer period. So yeah, that absolutely had an effect here. You mentioned before that this could cause ripples across sport worldwide. And earlier today, we talked to Canadian soccer star Stephanie Labbe, who used to play for our national team here, about what this moment means for Canada. She also said, This is what is right. We shouldn't be patting people on the back for getting to this point. This is what is right. We shouldn't be patting people on the back for getting to this point. The people we should be celebrating are the players that have fought for this and the players that have fought behind the scenes for years and years and years to get to this point. But, you know, these agreements, I hope, are a way of the future and a way that all of national teams are going to be moving towards because it's... What do you think is likely to happen from here? I really don't know. And that's kind of the scary part, right? Because you hope that this will become a springboard for change. We've seen other federations have done equal pay

structures. Australia, New Zealand, I believe Netherlands is on track to have some kind of ramping up towards an equal pay structure by the 2023 World Cup. So other federations, they're sensing which way the wind is blowing. And they're seeing like, oh, especially in countries where the women's national teams may be a little bit more successful than men's national teams. I think that applies to Australia, New Zealand, maybe not Netherlands, but they're sensing like, oh, the times they are a change and we got to change with them too. The women's teams are also sensing the power and collective action. I think that's another thing that culturally that ties into this, especially in the United States. Right now, there's a massive, let's not overstate it. There's a moderate groundswell of support for

collective action, collective labor action, unionization. Yeah, yeah. Not just here. You're talking about Amazon, Uber too, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. I believe Starbucks, Target, all these places are seeing employees talking about unionization, especially after a period in the United States where unionization really got defanged and given a bad rap by, you know, corporate actors. So I think that all ties together into this and the Federation see like, we gotta, if we want to stay on top, we gotta start making changes to the way that we fund women's teams. Also, if this women's team, this number one women's team is suddenly spending a lot more money, we're not going to be competitive unless we restructure our payment as well, so that we similarly keep investing money into our women's programs. So I think there's definitely some self-interest that I think federations need to take note of here as well. Beth, this was really interesting. Thank you so much for coming by.

Well, thanks for having me on. So I want to share with you one of our CBC podcasts that I've been listening to. We featured it before on our FrontBurner feed. It's called Nothing is Foreign, CBC's world news podcast. Every week, you'll be taken on a trip around the world to the heart of the biggest international news stories. This week, the show is looking into a controversial court decision in Israel that could force out more than a thousand Palestinians from what they say is their land in the West Bank. Well, Israel argues Palestinians

have no right to be there. You can listen to full episodes of Nothing is Foreign and subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts. New episodes are out every Friday morning. Here now is a clip from this week's episode. This is Basil Audra, a Palestinian journalist talking about what he's experienced and reported on. My life is totally under the Israeli occupation army rules. They're controlling everything about our life. Like if I turn to exiting from my community toward the city or other communities,

I would have flying checkpoint of soldiers stopping in the entrance and checking everyone, body and car. Few hundreds meters away, there is a settlement and outpost that were built on our land and expanding every day under our eyes, building more homes,

structures for the settlers, roads, water on our land while we are prevented. All right, that is all for today. Front Burner is brought to you by CBC News and CBC Podcasts. The show is produced this week by Ali Janes, Imogen Burchard, Simi Bassi, Katie Toth, Ben Andrews. Our sound design was by Nourdin Kourane and Mackenzie Cameron. Our music is by Joseph Chabison. The executive producer of

Frontburner is Nick McCabe-Locos, and I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.