afl vs players pay dispute

[Blue1980]

Again, why should they give a hoot what the public thinks? Think you're drastically overstating the worth of the public.

Well the fact they wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t supported in such huge numbers by the public?

If they didn’t care what the public thought they would all stfu, the whole “we sacrificed ourselves for the bushfire game” is clearly a narrative they have gone with, considering how many have mentioned it.

Their trying to get public support but appear totally tone deaf and out of touch.

 

[Blue1980]

In a majority of disputes i take the players side, but this time for the future of the game they need to see the seriousness of the whole situation and be less selfish.
They need to think about the 10's of thousands of fans who are losing their jobs.

Not to mention 75% of staff at their own clubs either stood down without pay or made redundant.

They showed their hand when they said they wanted a 23 round season when the AFL said we’d be doing a 17 game one. Anyone looking after their own self interest at a time like this doesn’t come off well at all.

 

[Minidisc MD]

have we all realised what an entitled, prissy, sensitive little ********er Jack Riewoldt is? he looks an absolute prick lately. you know you're a **** when that senile old silly prick Leigh Matthews is more cogent and stinging than you.

 

[nick1408]

And how much worse off is Marlion going to be going from $100k (and hes probably getting more then that as he would have signed a new deal as a premiership player) to $87k for the year, compared to where he was 6 months ago plying his trade at Sth Freo? I hazard to guess he is still better off.

Marlion is on base payments of around $85k. He was still in negotiations for a new contract but that is obviously now on hold.

I have no idea how much better off he is than at South Fremantle as I have no idea what he was doing for work outside his semi-professional career over there. It isn't really comparing apples with apples when you compare a full time job to a semi-professional one.

 

[Falcon27]

Marlion is on base payments of around $85k. He was still in negotiations for a new contract but that is obviously now on hold.

I have no idea how much better off he is than at South Fremantle as I have no idea what he was doing for work outside his semi-professional career over there. It isn't really comparing apple with apples when you compare a full time job to a semi-professional one.

Off topic, but weren't those players who were drafted mid season last year on 6 month contracts? How would it be possible that he actually started this year without a contract in place?

 

[nick1408]

Off topic, but weren't those players who were drafted mid season last year on 6 month contracts? How would it be possible that he actually started this year without a contract in place?

They were on short term $50k contracts - yes. Marlion extended his on base payments (I think it was part of the contract terms for all those drafted that they could extend for one year with agreement of the club) and was renegotiating (or more accurately, planning on negotiating later in the season) so was on base salary plus match payments - https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl...ntract-talks-with-tigers-20200202-p53x0v.html

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Hmm let the AFLPA go with that narrative if they want to keep trying to dig themselves out of the hole they are in.

“We wanted to play but the big bad AFL stopped us”

I don't know if theyd use it as a narrative as such - moreso as a legal standpoint.

 

[Pessimistic]

Players need to realise short term pain for long term gain.

Put clubs out of existence, means less jobs for players.

Also the AFLPA wanted a percentage of revenue generated, which currently is about $0

the figure may be positive or negative, but its never $0. In fact there will be income

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Educate me.
How is it different? Cause I bet you have nfi you just making stuff up.

Ummm, an employment contract stipulates a bunch of shit. The most important part is that you're an employee.

As employee there's a bunch of shit that you agree to when you sign the employment contract. One of which is that your employer can give you the arse under certain circumstances.

However a contracted worker isn't an employee. They're contracted. The terms of the contract are fixed. Like a lease

A 12 month contract is a 12 month contract. You're guaranteed that if you honour your end of the contract - you get paid for 12 months. If the company you're contracted to changes their mind, bad luck. They still have to pay you.

AFL players and coaches are all on fixed contracts.

 

[Pessimistic]

Again, why should they give a hoot what the public thinks? Think you're drastically overstating the worth of the public.

look at the narrative last week compared to now. Completely different. the afl media has an attention span of a goldfish.

if they weren't beating this up it wouldn't even be in the public sphere at all

 

[Pessimistic]

Ummm, an employment contract stipulates a bunch of shit. The most important part is that you're an employee.

As employee there's a bunch of shit that you agree to when you sign the employment contract. One of which is that your employer can give you the arse under certain circumstances.

However a contracted worker isn't an employee. They're contracted. The terms of the contract are fixed. Like a lease

A 12 month contract is a 12 month contract. You're guaranteed that if you honour your end of the contract - you get paid for 12 months. If the company you're contracted to changes their mind, bad luck. They still have to pay you.

AFL players and coaches are all on fixed contracts.

interesting that chris scott is working for nothing, but brad scott is getting a payout for doing nothing

 

[Forever North]

Probably best if the AFLPA went into self isolation for a while. Doing themselves no favours at the moment.

 

[WillHayward]

Afl footballers career on average is less than 1/6th of other careers .
As such players taking a 50% pay cut for 6months is equivalent to someone else signing up for a 50% cut for more than 3 years.
I wonder if some of the ex players like Tredrea weighing into this are willing to put their hand their pocket and give some of what they earned ??
A bigger percentage cut with a repayment scheme into the future seems common sense .

That is a logical fallacy.
The economics don't work like that because it is not linear.
Most people have fixed costs. So the surplus shoots up over a certain level of pay.
E.g
If person A gets paid 500k for 4 years
Compared with Joe bloggs who gets paid 80k for 25 years.
Total is $2 million for both.
You are saying they are equal.
They aren't.

Joe Bloggs never has surplus and finishes with no savings.

Person A can save $200k for 4 years so has investments of $800k at the end of the 4 year career.. This surplus and investment can create a future ongoing income and capital gain.

Person A is miles ahead over the short and long term.

 

[MightyHawks]

I think we'll get rid of Foxtel tomorrow

Really we only have it for the footy - no worries paying for it all year either

Happy to get it back as soon as games are back on, but I have to say the players squabbling over not being paid as much when there are no games is encouraging me to stop paying Foxtel

If anyone knows Jack Riewoldt or Max Gawn can you ask them if they'd like to pay for my foxtel while there are no games?

 

[STFU Donnie]

Every little bit will help him out. So, I recommend all people attending games - when they eventually resume - show their sympathy for Jack's plight by showering him with 5 cent coins from the boundary.

Actually, come to think of it, that'd be effing awesome.

 

[longsuffreosupp]

I think we'll get rid of Foxtel tomorrow

Really we only have it for the footy - no worries paying for it all year either

Happy to get it back as soon as games are back on, but I have to say the players squabbling over not being paid as much when there are no games is encouraging me to stop paying Foxtel

If anyone knows Jack Riewoldt or Max Gawn can you ask them if they'd like to pay for my foxtel while there are no games?

Go tell Foxtel you're quitting. They'll get on their knees to keep you, but you can always put your account on hold for up to a year I think, so paying nothing until the footy comes back.

 

[WillHayward]

I don't really mind the players digging their heels in. I do mind that it's getting played out in the media. My thoughts are as follows:

- Someone like Lance Franklin is on millions. On the surface it seems like he could take an 80% pay cut and still get by on his $200k (most of us would love to be on $200k). Now, Lance looks at his finances. How does he pay the mortgage on his $2.3m property in Rose Bay? His other properties would need to be paid for as well. You can't just put a property on the market and expect it to be gone so you can use the money.

- Richmond has Dustin Martin and Tom Lynch on front-end/back-end contracts. Does the bloke on the front-ended deal cop a huge loss of pay while the back-ended guy still gets the bulk of his money later?

- Minimum salary is $85k for a rookie listed player. A 70% cut would see his wage drop to $25,500. AFL players are paid quarterly so for the next quarter he would receive $6375 instead of $21250. That's a huge adjustment to someone like say Marlion Pickett with 4 kids, a wife and a mortgage/rent. Marlion would have been thinking he could top up his pay packet with match payments but that option is gone too.

There aren't too many jobs I can think of where the minimum and maximum wage are so far apart for doing the exact same job with the exact same expectations. Everyone more or less lives to the means of their pay packet. I know if I was on Lance's pay packet I'd be in a much nicer house and own much nicer things (even be able to invest in say the share market) as I could rely on my big pay packet. Conversely, On Marlion's minimum payments i'd be in a much crappier house than Lance with much crappier things but still living within my means.

Just because someone is on a good wicket doesn't mean they don't have bills like the rest of us. Hell, they may even be much bigger bill that requires a much bigger wage. The current argument being played out in the media is too simplistic. The AFL/clubs need to safeguard but the players also need to safeguard themselves as well.

Marlion would not be on minimum wage.
No chance. He got offers to leave and stayed.
Probably 300k.
A year ago was probably on 30.
So he's going ok even with a big haircut.

And the Buddy house repayments?
So what?

 

[Hawkboy62]

Think this impasse will be resolved fairly quickly, but bad optics in the case of Gil, who should have offered a bigger sacrifice from the fat cats straight away, and from some of the AFLPA spokespersons. A big haircut for a couple of months and then a review. We'd all like to see footy resume but ....

The bigger picture for the AFL will be trying to keep the clubs afloat. All the clubs will post large losses, with, at most, one round of gate receipts each rather than 11. Bearing in mind that many were borderline profitable in the normal years several will be insolvent without AFL guarantees. The AFL will need a substantial line of credit, with much of it's principal assets being severely impaired (Marvel - unable to be used until ? & broadcasting rights similarly). Even if the clubs collectively agree to provide collateral the line of credit will be expensive and impact future distributions to the clubs.

Expect to see leaner clubs in future; those that survive. Was so happy to see the season begin a week ago but the landscape has changed dramatically.

 

[Kappa]

I think we'll get rid of Foxtel tomorrow

Really we only have it for the footy - no worries paying for it all year either

Happy to get it back as soon as games are back on, but I have to say the players squabbling over not being paid as much when there are no games is encouraging me to stop paying Foxtel

If anyone knows Jack Riewoldt or Max Gawn can you ask them if they'd like to pay for my foxtel while there are no games?

Will Foxtel still be around in 12 months?

 

[WillHayward]

heck I'm depressed

 

[Minidisc MD]

**** I'm depressed

you need priorities then.

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

Ummm, an employment contract stipulates a bunch of shit. The most important part is that you're an employee.

As employee there's a bunch of shit that you agree to when you sign the employment contract. One of which is that your employer can give you the arse under certain circumstances.

However a contracted worker isn't an employee. They're contracted. The terms of the contract are fixed. Like a lease

A 12 month contract is a 12 month contract. You're guaranteed that if you honour your end of the contract - you get paid for 12 months. If the company you're contracted to changes their mind, bad luck. They still have to pay you.

AFL players and coaches are all on fixed contracts.

And you are, in fact, wrong.
Football players are employees on fixed contracts. They're not contractors, which is what you're describing in your third paragraph.

Under the fair work act, employees can be stood down if work is not available for reasons beyond the employers control.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I started a thread on the Port board about the financial impact on the structure of Port, the AFL and the lasting issues. Been going for a few days but tonight I tried to work out what an 80% pay cut for the players looks like compared to the dole, which has been doubled. This is a straight cut and paste of what I posted.

The dole - Newstart Allowance has been doubled from approx $550 a fortnight to approx $1,100 a fortnight. That is what some people have to now live on after getting the axe and may take years to find a replacement job.

The players won't be on 20% of their 2020 salary in 2021 if there is a full season. TV guys will pay their contracted amounts or close to it so the players will get their proper contracted amounts or close to it.

I assume that the players base salary for March will be paid on 31st March and the minimum $5,000 per game match payment that the players would have got for Rd 1.

So I reckon the players should accept something like this
Base payment $80,000 to $200,000 a year get $1,000 a week
Base payment $200,001 to $300,000 a year get $1,500 a week
Base payment $300,001+ a year get $2,000 a week

Given the statistical average 2019 was the following from AFL annual report





and from the earnings bands after taking into account match payments of $5,000, unless a player accepted a lower base and higher match payments, roughly 1/3rd of players fall into each band, so approx 15 players per band.

That would be a wages bill of $15k +$22.5k +$30k = $67.5k a week. Over a quarter of the year that would be 13 x $67.5k = $877.5k.

The 2020 salary cap amount per club is $13.013m (yes I know there was $14m payments counted outside the cap in 2019 AFL wide) and the Additional Service Agreements are worth $1.159m, which maybe paid by either the club, or a sponsor, or associate of the club, the potential annual player wages bill is $14.172m.

So over 13 weeks the players would get approx $3.5m at a club that pays 100% of the salary cap and ASA's.

$877.5/$3,500 = 25.07% is what the players would get paid over those 3 months. The AFL apparently is asking for them to get paid only 20% or 21%, depending on which report you read, but want to make it an equal cut across the board.

I have allowed for rookies to get more than 20% and some of those over a base of $300k, to get less than 20% for those who get over $500,000 are getting less than 20% pay.

A rookie only earning $80,000 a year and $500 a SANFL/WAFL/VFL game would be getting the equivalent of $1538 per week + $500 per sanfl game = $2038 per week before tax.

The AFL would be asking them to earn 20% of $1,538 per week = $307.60 per week which would be all tax free whereas on the dole they could now get approx $550 per week tax free.

That's why it can't be a blunt equal 80% pay cut across the board.

 

[Bluey Shelton]

Dangerflog

Total tool

 

[rcme2fast]

Just my thoughts but with the current situation on player payments and how much the afl talk up being broke or going broke should there be a basic payment structure introduced for the next 4 or 5 years to help recover ?

Something like below

1st & 2nd year players $60,000 + education/qualification/trade @ choice of players preference

3rd & 4th year players $80,000 + education/qualification/trade @ choice of players preference

5th to 8th year player $120,000 + business/management education @ choice of players preference

9th to 11th year players $160,000 business investment planning @ choice of players preference

The above is a flat payment for all players across the board based on years of service.

The base payment is on top of the clubs paying each player a flat amount of $35,000 per annum for living expenses.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com