PLAYERS believe they are paid less even after winning twice as much as men's team.

The US women's national team last Friday filed an appeal against a legal setback in their equal pay lawsuit, saying they are being paid less than the men even they win twice as much.

In dismissing their equal pay claim last Friday, Judge Gary Klausner said the case was unwarranted  because they had previously turned down an offer in the Collective Bargaining Agreement negotiations to be paid along the lines of the US's men's team.

''The argument that women gave up a right to equal pay by accepting the best collective bargaining agreement possible in response to the Federation's refusal to put equal pay on the table is not a legitimate reason for continuing the discrimination against them,'' said USWNT spokesperson Molly Levinson on Friday night.

She listed a series of grievances in the motion to appeal which was filed in a federal district court  in California and is part of a larger lawsuit for equal pay.

Levinson said the women are being discriminated against because they are not getting as much as the men on a per game basis and that making ''close to the same amount'' is not valid.

''Equal pay means paying women players the same rate for winning a game as men get paid,'' Levinson said.

''The argument that women are paid enough if they make close to the same amount as men while winning more than twice as often is not equal pay.
''The argument that maternity  leave is some sort of substitute for paying women players the same rate for winning as men is not valid, nor fair, nor equal.

''Today, we are filing a motion to allow us to appeal immediately the district court's decision so that the Ninth Circuit will be able to review these claims.''

The US women, who clinched back-to-back World Cup wins with victory at last year's finals in France, has based their claim for back pay in the disparities between prize money distributed by  FIFA at the men's and women's World Cups. [AFP]


Post a Comment

Grace A Comment!