On March 31, 2016, five key members of the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team announced their filing of a wage discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") against the U.S. Soccer Federation (the governing body of soccer in America). Carli Lloyd, Alex Morgan, Hope Solo, Megan Rapinoe, and Becky Sauerbrunn claim that the U.S. Soccer Federation violated the Equal Pay Act of 1963 because women players earn significantly less than their male counterparts, despite generating more revenue for the U.S. Soccer Federation. The players state that the women's team generated a $16 million profit, while the men's team had a loss.
Separate collective bargaining agreements established the pay structure for the men's and women's teams, but the women's team claims that its CBA has expired. The women players are salaried employees, while their male counterparts' compensation is based on bonuses received when joining the national team. The women players contend that this bonus structure allows the men to earn significantly more. For example, when playing in an international friendly match, men can earn as much as $17,625 for a win, $8,125 for a tie, and $5,000 for a loss1. Conversely, women receive a bonus of $1,350 for playing in an international friendly match, but only if they win. They receive no bonuses for losses or ties.
Numbers reported by Sports Illustrated further demonstrate the divide in payment for participation in World Cup games. Though the women's team won last year's World Cup, figures show that currently women players only receive a bonus for playing in the World Cup if they finish fourth or better. On the other hand, players for the men's team earn $6,875 per World Cup game played, regardless of the result. They also receive a bonus for each point they earn in pool play and for each round they advance in the tournament.
The women's team's complaint has already resulted in renewed attention to the issue of pay inequality between men and women in the workplace, including in the professional sports context. Indeed, though unequal pay remains a vital issue in employment law, employers often fail to examine and address their own pay policies and structures. In March, for example, NFI RoadRail, LLC and NFI Industries, Inc. agreed to pay $45,000 and furnish other relief to settle a gender-based discrimination lawsuit brought by the EEOC. In that suit, the EEOC alleged that NFI paid a female director of international operations in Irving, Texas, less than three male directors who held the same position.2
Also of note, the players' complaint comes on the heels of the EEOC's recent announcement regarding its proposed revisions for the Employer Information Report (EEO-1). On January 29, 2016, the EEOC announced that it will amend the EEO-1 data collection requirements to include pay information from large employers. Currently, employers have to provide information regarding their employees' ethnicity, race, sex, and job category. The new changes—set to take effect in 2017—will also require employers with 100 or more employees to submit information regarding their employees' pay and hours worked. The EEOC published the proposed changes in the Federal Register on February 1, 2016, and the time to submit comments ended April 1, 2016.
The EEOC believes that this additional data will assist in identifying possible pay discrimination claims and help employers promote equal pay in the workplace. Given the impending regulations and the increased scrutiny of the gender pay gap, employers should take the time to examine their pay policies and structures and ensure that they are in compliance with the Equal Pay Act of 1963, so they are not caught "off sides" regarding a wage discrimination claim.
1All data regarding bonuses is from Sports Illustrated; Grant Wahl, USWNT stars accuse U.S. Soccer of wage discrimination in EEOC filing (Mar. 31, 2016), click here to read article
2For more information, see the EEOC's press release here.
