LOS ANGELES (CN) — The U.S. women’s soccer team’s settlement of claims against their governing federation of inequitable working conditions represents a breakthrough in the parties’ long running legal battle, but experts said Wednesday the path to resolving remaining equal pay claims is riddled with complexity.
The U.S women’s national team players — holders of the Women’s World Cup trophy — filed a gender discrimination lawsuit in March 2019 against U.S. Soccer Federation claiming women would have earned more compensation under the men’s national team’s pay structure.
Women also say in their lawsuit the federation deprives them of the expensive charter flights and hotel rooms and superior medical and training staff provided to the men’s team.
The federation has argued in court papers both national teams operate under separate collective bargaining agreements and that many women’s contracts are supplemented by their salaries in professional domestic soccer leagues.
In May, a federal judge in Los Angeles struck a blow to the players’ claims when he granted the federation summary judgment, finding the women earned more in cumulative pay under the work contract they collectively bargained for.
But both sides announced Tuesday a proposed settlement over players’ inequitable working conditions claims, with the U.S. governing body agreeing to provide hotel accommodations, charter flights and professional training and support staff that is on par with what the men’s national team is provided.
The agreement means the claims won’t be put to trial, which had been scheduled for next month.
Susan Estrich, professor of law and gender discrimination at the University of Southern California, said in an interview Wednesday the proposed settlement represents important progress for the world of womens’ sports.
“It may sound like small things but they’re rather large things when you’re living on the road,” Estrich said of players’ working conditions. “Quality of life matters and it matters in terms of performance. They would never treat an NBA player that way.”
But the equal pay claims remain unresolved, having not been covered in the proposed settlement.
“It was not a good day for equal pay,” Estrich said. “Women’s soccer, unlike a host of other women’s sports, has already captured the affection and attention of people who probably never watched women play anything. Now the federation is saying, ‘You can have a nice flight and stay in a nice hotel, but you come home to small paycheck.’”
The federation did say Tuesday it agrees to select match venues that have natural turf, not the artificial surfaces that women have said for years are the cause of injuries and represent a step down from professional level fields men play on.
Final approval of the settlement will be decided next year by U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner.
The path to resolving wage discrimination claims is entangled by prospective court rulings and hopes that a settlement is still possible.
The womens’ attorneys indicated they will now appeal Klausner’s summary judgment ruling from May while continuing to seek millions in back pay.
U.S. Soccer president Cindy Parlow Cone, a former national team player, told reporters Tuesday the women’s team rejected a contract offer that matches the men’s terms and that paying the requested $67 million in back pay would likely bankrupt the organization.
But if the federation — with the winds of a summary judgment victory at its back — prevails on the Ninth Circuit appeal, they could negotiate a reduced settlement with players, said Gina Miller, employment law attorney at Snell and Wilmer.
“The federation is negotiating from a position of strength and they’re not incentivized to pay a lot to settle the case,” Miller said. “That changes if the Ninth Circuit reverses but I’m sure the federation put a dollar figure on that risk. They’re basically willing to roll the dice.”