3 ms·
In the case of US Soccer, the women bring in significantly more revenue than the men but are paid far less. https://www.vox.com/2019/7/10/20686692/us-womens-soc
by benzible 5y ago
In the case of US Soccer, the women bring in significantly more revenue than the men but are paid far less. https://www.vox.com/2019/7/10/20686692/us-womens-soccer-team-parade-equal-pay https://www.vox.com/2019/7/10/20686692/us-womens-soccer-team...
- ativzzz 5y agoThis is also because the women's team had originally negotiated a contract that prefers stable salaries over the higher risk-reward benefit that comes with winning: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/09/22/uswnt-equal-pay-lawsuit-appeal/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/09/22/uswnt-equal...
- Shadonototra 5y agoI wasn't aware of this story, thanks
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- rsj_hn 5y agoThis is because there are labor markets — men’s soccer as a global labor market makes so much more that players have better options even if a specific team is not doing well. That’s why you don’t do wage comparisons on a team basis but market basis. I’m sure there’s some flagging software company that earns lower revenues than a thriving restaurant, but the devs at that company will still earn more than the waiters at the restaurant. The only way to change that is to make it illegal for workers to look for better employers, and make it illegal for firms to look for cheaper workers. But until that changes, individual employers will pay the prevailing wage, regardless of how much revenue they are getting. This also works in the other direction. Company X makes so much but they only pay their cooks such low wages, etc.