The AFL and the Players’ Association remain significantly apart in negotiations on the next Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).
While neither party is yet doubting a middle ground will eventually be found, there are still several stumbling blocks which are likely to see discussions stretch out for several months.
Earlier in the year the AFL Players’ Association, which is pursuing a joint CBA which would see AFLW and AFL players share 32 percent of the game’s revenue, sent a proposal to the league.
In their pitch the Players’ Association argued for a four-year CBA. But in the AFL’s formal response less than a fortnight ago, the league said its preference was for a nine-year CBA.
The AFL’s monster nine-year CBA request lines up with the $4.5 billion broadcast rights deal, which will roll over in 2025 and expire in 2031.
The league wants certainty in its finances and locking in a long-term arrangement with the Players’ Association would tick a fundamental box.
Conversely, AFLPA believes there is too much uncertainty associated with a deal stretching into the 2030s. With no clear answers or timeline on Tasmania and no AFL commitment to a fully-fledged AFLW fixture, the players’ union – which has been led by Paul Marsh since 2014 – will baulk at the ambitious proposal.
Player agents have told SEN.com.au the AFLPA is seeking a substantial “bounce” in the first year of the next CBA and steady growth in the years following.
The AFLPA pushing for a greater share of the AFL’s annual $643 million injection of broadcast cash is the major battle ground in negotiations.
Though in early discussions it has become apparent there are other areas the AFL and AFLPA will need to find common ground on too. These include how the industry looks after its (past and present) players from a health and safety perspective, as well as its commitment to issues of race and gender.
On race and gender, one high level club source said that while the industry generates great revenue, it is not so adept at looking after its people.
This is where the AFLPA is aiming to formalise ways to protect its player cohort on key societal issues.
THE AFLW DISCUSSION
The AFL and AFL Players' Association don't disagree on everything. They broadly share the view that AFLW players deserve a pay rise, but they disagree on the percentage increase and where the money should come from.
The league believes men should sacrifice a portion of their salary to support the female game, while the AFLPA does not believe it’s appropriate for male employees to take a cut for female employees.
Men subsidising women is a prospect the AFLPA won’t entertain and this view is supported by both AFL and AFLW players.
Instead, their solution is to increase the slice of the pie to 32 per cent, up from 28 percent for the male players only.
If the AFL accepts the AFLPA’s option, AFLW players would be paid 12 months of the year instead of nine as soon as 2024 and by 2026 every female player would receive a full-time salary with a minimum wage rising to $70,000.
Currently the average AFLW player wage is $55,000 and the minimum wage is $40,000. All players are on nine-month playing contracts and have just been paid again after three months without any income from football.
The short-term deal which allowed the AFLW season to begin last August resulted in a 94 percent pay rise on average across the competition.
Despite this, it has become a not-so-quiet source of frustration among AFLW players that they are expected to train and treat their bodies like elite athletes all year round but only get paid for nine months and play as few as 10 home and away games per season.
One of the key objectives of the AFL’s Women’s Football Vision from late 2021 was to have AFLW players become the highest paid domestic athletes in Australia by 2030.
But following Cricket Australia’s landmark agreement with their players’ union just weeks ago, minimum wage for domestic female cricketers has climbed to $100,000 per year, leaving the AFL well behind in their stated pursuit.
Subscribe to the SEN YouTube channel for the latest videos!
THE COVID CLAUSE
In 2020 players lost 30 percent of their salaries as Covid-19 wreaked havoc on the league, its clubs, and the competition.
By 2021, the league was eager for players to take a substantial pay cut again. Ultimately an agreement was reached for a collective reduction of approximately 9 per cent that flowed through to around 3.5 per cent for individual players, with lists cut to minimise the financial burden.
As the competition came out of the pandemic, the industry generated in excess of $100 million in revenues above forecast and male players received $30 million as part of their revenue share deal. Still, players were left significantly worse off following 2020.
One of the proposals the union has put forward essentially asks future players to pay back past players from 2020.
Under the agreement, every listed player in 2020 would receive 25 percent of the money they lost back by the end of the next CBA. This will see roughly $20 million paid back to footballers from 2020. This would come from the players’ share of revenue, rather than be an additional ask from the AFL.
For example, If a player lost $100,000 in 2020, they would receive $25,000 back whenever the CBA concludes (at the latest).
AFLPA president Patrick Dangerfield discussed the 'Covid clause' late last year.
“Off the back of Covid, this next renegotiation of the CBA, I think it’d be appropriate to reward everyone within the game who has given up a huge amount of the past two years the same level of KPI increase, regardless of what the next CBA increase is,” Dangerfield said on The Field with JJ and Danger podcast.
“So, if it’s seven per cent, rather than just the best players who have had the ability to put that in the contract, I think that should be all 850 players who have contributed to the game and growing it and keeping it going at a time that was really difficult for the league.”
There is also a view among player managers that the predicted “bounce” in the first year of the next CBA is partly to thank veteran players who took pay cuts in Covid but won’t be around long enough to reap the full benefits of the new deal.
While there is no immediate rush to get the CBA done, it's been noted among managers and club officials that the men's and women's deals expired last October and have simply rolled over to 2023.
"We did, I think, a landmark female players deal last year," AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan said in December.
"I know Paul (Marsh) has talked about an integrated CBA going forward so there is an opportunity to do that. The way they're going to line up and how that fits in and how they might do that is something that still needs to be discussed. We will see where we land."