Jump to content
KieranR

Equal Pay

Recommended Posts

In the pro fields, do men and women get equal pay in this sport?

The WSL has just announced that from 2019 the women surfers in all WSL controlled events will receive equal pay to the men's divisions.

Congrats to the WSL on this.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, KieranR said:

In the pro fields, do men and women get equal pay in this sport?

The WSL has just announced that from 2019 the women surfers in all WSL controlled events will receive equal pay to the men's divisions.

Congrats to the WSL on this.  

Speaking of which-ive never understood why female tennis players get paid the same as men when they only do 3 sets? Its not a physical thing as women still do full marathons and IM etc. I think they should do 5 sets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In most races yes. This was championed by Erin Baker amongst others

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no issue with the tennis. I think the women's game attracts as much interest and sponsorship money as the men's.

I think in some sports though it is being seen as wrong, because 90% of the money is brought into the sport by the men, and their pay is being brought down to bump up the women's pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, KieranR said:

In the pro fields, do men and women get equal pay in this sport?

The WSL has just announced that from 2019 the women surfers in all WSL controlled events will receive equal pay to the men's divisions.

Congrats to the WSL on this.  

 

9 minutes ago, more said:

Speaking of which-ive never understood why female tennis players get paid the same as men when they only do 3 sets? Its not a physical thing as women still do full marathons and IM etc. I think they should do 5 sets.

Okay.... I can't help myself here.

In the business world equal pay is a must based on the roles are like for like.

In the sporting world its a huge disparity and rightly so. Those sports that normally back equal prize money can absorb it. But is it right or justified. I say no. The prime example here is Tennis.

All the Grand Slams now have equal prize money, and I can tell you that this pisses the men off no end.

How many 5 set matches do the women play ever......................0 (Zero)

Serena W is in the semi and has play 11 sets. (and only 1 3 set match)

Millman and Nadal have both played 18 sets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: most women's sports do not attract big crowds or big viewing audiences hence the pay should not be the same.

However if more viewers were to watch women's sport then fair enough pay them more but the reality is - it doesn't happen.

Serena Williams is probably the exception to the rule here and in my view she is probably the only one that does deserve equal pay, because the stats don't lie....she does bring in big crowds and lots of viewers on the TV. Good on her.

So to all those who may think my thoughts are sexist they are not. I am all for equal pay if deserved.

A thought: Do women AFL, Soccer, Rugby, League players deserve the same money as the Men........? The answer is no, as they do not bring in the dollars....... it's simple economics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the winner of the 400m at the World Championships should get more than the winner of the 100m? 

It should be based on the value of the job/performance. If the women generate $1M in revenue, and the men $9M, why should they get equal return. It's the same in business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny isn't it-women are approx 50% of the population, maybe they just don't like sport as much as men as a whole.

Whereas I'm sure more women are interested in fashion than men-do male models get paid the same as female models?

I'm happy for equal pay, but they should work the same hours i.e 5 sets,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can talk equality in pay etc, and talk about the tennis etc etc.  But really, is there equal pay in most Sports out there?  Do women's soccer players make the same?  How about golfers, or boxers, or cricketers?  Sure, there are some.  But aren't they the anomaly, not the norm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for equality too, in everything.  I get what people say too though, in what brings in the money......

I say the men are getting paid too much and drop them down to match the women.  Seriously, way too many people making way too much money in this world......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, goughy said:

I'm all for equality too, in everything.  I get what people say too though, in what brings in the money......

I say the men are getting paid too much and drop them down to match the women.  Seriously, way too many people making way too much money in this world......

I'm not for equality.  I'm for,  you get paid what you are worth.  

Now, generally,  in sport,  that will work itself out by viewers or what not.  

Also,  the sponsorship dollars are where it's at in the big sports,  so that's where the chicks like Williams can make the big dollars,  and they deserve it.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, mhvh said:

I'm not for equality.  I'm for,  you get paid what you are worth.  

Now, generally,  in sport,  that will work itself out by viewers or what not.  

Also,  the sponsorship dollars are where it's at in the big sports,  so that's where the chicks like Williams can make the big dollars,  and they deserve it.  

 

In sport, that about sums it up. It's all about TV and sponsorship dollars. ( and why many sports have been ruined, but that's another issue )

Fancy sitting around watching a bunch of multi millionaires running around the pitch / field / court on the weekend, wearing their sponsored outfit and slipping on their sponsored watch for the TV interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes you have to invest in something initially to make it successful.  Nobody is going to watch a sh!t team, with sh!t skills and boring play - if you pay them more, more players will come, it will attract better skills and hopefully better play.  Then come more spectators...  Yeah, at the moment men are more interested in watching the footy / afl / basketball, but that may change with more investment in the women's versions of the leagues...

Re tennis, are you going to the tennis to watch 5 hours of tennis, or going to watch a great match?  Is it about the length of play, or about the competition?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on the sport and the comparable quality. Skill level of female surfers vs male surfers is incomparable, you have guys surfing 80 foot waves, women surfers are on a par with 10 - 12 year old boys, similar with soccer. Whereas triathlon, I feel they should be on equal pay. You have triathletes like Chrissie Wellington, Rhyf and Lucy Charles beating male pros and in Lucy's case beating all the male pros for the swim leg in some races. So it's a case by case basis. It also depends on what money is available, English premier league players earn up $20 million a year, female equivalents are on around $50'000 a year, but they have around 1000 spectators at a game.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, zed said:

It depends on the sport and the comparable quality. Skill level of female surfers vs male surfers is incomparable, you have guys surfing 80 foot waves, women surfers are on a par with 10 - 12 year old boys, similar with soccer. Whereas triathlon, I feel they should be on equal pay. You have triathletes like Chrissie Wellington, Rhyf and Lucy Charles beating male pros and in Lucy's case beating all the male pros for the swim leg in some races. So it's a case by case basis. It also depends on what money is available, English premier league players earn up $20 million a year, female equivalents are on around $50'000 a year, but they have around 1000 spectators at a game.. 

The standard of women’s surfing is right up there and I absolutely think top tier girls like Steph Gilmore would take a few heats off the men in 4 ft snapper. And this is the WSL, no one is surfing 80ft waves, it’s same locations at the same time so I can’t see a reason for different pay. 

 

Heres a question that I don’t know the answer to; does a company like Billabong make more profit from the guys or girls retail side of things?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The nine network state the netball super league is a ratings success. The audience is apparently there.  Not too sure how they gather their ratings  Does it distinguish btw tyre kickers tuning in briefly and viewers watching the whole game ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Merv said:

The nine network state the netball super league is a ratings success. The audience is apparently there.

So they should be paid more than male netballers. That's fair.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

So they should be paid more than male netballers. That's fair.

I heard there's a push to get more guys playing netball.  Locally here I think they can play up till the age of 12.  And there was one transgender identifying girl playing in our local comp this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Merv said:

The nine network state the netball super league is a ratings success. The audience is apparently there.  Not too sure how they gather their ratings  Does it distinguish btw tyre kickers tuning in briefly and viewers watching the whole game ?

Ratings are a funny thing.  You look at the morning shows.  They only officially rate in the few hundred thousand viewers each, low enough that any other program would get dumped.  But they say millions actually watch about 5mins worth each day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard an interview with Erin Baker, possibly on IM Talk Legends podcast. She spoke about the efforts that were made to get prize money equality. 

WTC races and ITU races have equal prize money. I suspect the same is not true with sponsorship levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BogFrog said:

Sometimes you have to invest in something initially to make it successful.  Nobody is going to watch a sh!t team, with sh!t skills and boring play - if you pay them more, more players will come, it will attract better skills and hopefully better play.  Then come more spectators...  Yeah, at the moment men are more interested in watching the footy / afl / basketball, but that may change with more investment in the women's versions of the leagues...

Exactly. The "get paid what you bring in"  argument misses a big point about systemic differences in structure / promotion etc between the men and women's games. I'm not saying it should necessarily all be equal but it's not as simple as I think it's being portrayed.

As a thought experiment imagine a business in which the board, the sales team and the delivery team were all men and the only women were the receptionist, the switchboard person and the tea maker.... Yeah the men should earn more than the women because "they bring in the money" but wouldn't you think there was a wider issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trying to sound sexist or anything here, or whatever.....

But who makes more money?  Male or female beach volleyball players?  Big difference in wardrobe;  boardies and singlets vs skimpy bikinis.  Anyone know who is the bigger drawcard in that sport?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, goughy said:

Ratings are a funny thing.  You look at the morning shows.  They only officially rate in the few hundred thousand viewers each, low enough that any other program would get dumped.  But they say millions actually watch about 5mins worth each day.

 

5 min of Kosh is all I can take.....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so heres one out of left field

The Women in the Porn Industry get paid significantly more than the male performers.

The women attract the punters to a greater degree........is this not comparable to what lots are saying about the value of what you are doing and what your worth is on the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Triatx said:

Ok so heres one out of left field

The Women in the Porn Industry get paid significantly more than the male performers.

The women attract the punters to a greater degree........is this not comparable to what lots are saying about the value of what you are doing and what your worth is on the market.

 

They have more assets on show?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have one higher risk outcome within their industry than the men..... Pregnancy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, goughy said:

They have one higher risk outcome within their industry than the men..... Pregnancy!

That risk can be terminated post incident so hardly a risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

 

Okay.... I can't help myself here.

In the business world equal pay is a must based on the roles are like for like.

In the sporting world its a huge disparity and rightly so. Those sports that normally back equal prize money can absorb it. But is it right or justified. I say no. The prime example here is Tennis.

All the Grand Slams now have equal prize money, and I can tell you that this pisses the men off no end.

How many 5 set matches do the women play ever......................0 (Zero)

Serena W is in the semi and has play 11 sets. (and only 1 3 set match)

Millman and Nadal have both played 18 sets.

The 3 set 5 set argument is clutching at straws IMO

Fed and Nadal (and many others) have both won tournaments in the past without dropping a set, winning every match in straight sets. I don't remember hearing calls for them to be paid less because of that. Most smaller tournaments around the world the guys only play 3 set anyway.

The prize money for any tennis tournament is set beforehand, it goes to the winner of the tournament, you win the tournament by defeating all of you're opposition all the way to the final, not for how long you are on court. If the guy and the girl both have to win 8 matches to be the champion, then IMO they should be paid the same for being the champion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, prizna said:

That risk can be terminated post incident so hardly a risk.

Not when they are all good catholic girls...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, prizna said:

That risk can be terminated post incident so hardly a risk.

Spoken only like a man can. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, BogFrog said:

Nobody is going to watch a sh!t team, with sh!t skills and boring play

Oh, I don't know

The Dragons still manage to draw a bit of a crowd

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we take the tennis example of less time on court could mean less money for females. Does than mean less money for male IM winners because they do the race faster than the females? 

(I am not being serious)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mike Del said:

The 3 set 5 set argument is clutching at straws IMO

Fed and Nadal (and many others) have both won tournaments in the past without dropping a set, winning every match in straight sets. I don't remember hearing calls for them to be paid less because of that. Most smaller tournaments around the world the guys only play 3 set anyway.

The prize money for any tennis tournament is set beforehand, it goes to the winner of the tournament, you win the tournament by defeating all of you're opposition all the way to the final, not for how long you are on court. If the guy and the girl both have to win 8 matches to be the champion, then IMO they should be paid the same for being the champion.

So why are the men.... Ie Djokovic, Federer, Murray leading the charge saying they deserve more than the women.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

So why are the men.... Ie Djokovic, Federer, Murray leading the charge saying they deserve more than the women.

 

Wrong. Google "equal pay Murray". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

Why don't they end the debate, either play 5 sets at majors for men and women or have everyone play 3. 

Why would they? There's no debate amongst anyone that matters. It's done. Certain people can moan about it but it's not going to change back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, monkie said:

Why would they? There's no debate amongst anyone that matters. It's done. Certain people can moan about it but it's not going to change back.

who matters? Tennis is boring but lots of people watch it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

who matters? Tennis is boring but lots of people watch it. 

The people that decide these things. There just isn't a debate. It's done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, monkie said:

The people that decide these things. There just isn't a debate. It's done. 

Suppose since its decided lets not change it. While back the people that decided also decided women should not vote or have many rights. "the people that decide these things. There just isn't a debate. It's done"

South Africa decided stuff to for a while about rights based on race, should we have just accepted that and not had the debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

Suppose since its decided lets not change it. While back the people that decided also decided women should not vote or have many rights. "the people that decide these things. There just isn't a debate. It's done"

South Africa decided stuff to for a while about rights based on race, should we have just accepted that and not had the debate

Nah feel free to have the debate on an internet forum. I was responding to your "Why don't they end the debate" comment. As far as the people who make these decisions are concerned they have ended the debate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and comparing a decision to pay equal pay to apartheid is really rather offensive and a bit silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why people keep talking about relative effort (eg 3 sets vs 5 sets) with respect to prizemoney.  Money in professional sport isn't about effort or ability or who deserves more. It's about entertainment. That's it.

While the same amount of people tune in to watch Federer as Serena Williams, they'll get paid the same amount. Which is fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, monkie said:

Oh and comparing a decision to pay equal pay to apartheid is really rather offensive and a bit silly.

why are you offened

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

why are you offened

Because you appear to have drawn a parallel between decades of race crime and the decision to pay folk equally... Whether you think equal pay is right or wrong (and you are welcome to your opinion on that) to suggest it is in any way equivalent is a bit much and therefore, to me, offensive. 

E2A: I'm using the phrase "bit much" in the British sense... i.e. it means totally unacceptable.

Edited by monkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, monkie said:

Because you appear to have drawn a parallel between decades of race crime and the decision to pay folk equally... Whether you think equal pay is right or wrong (and you are welcome to your opinion on that) to suggest it is in any way equivalent is a bit much and therefore, to me, offensive. 

E2A: I'm using the phrase "bit much" in the British sense... i.e. it means totally unacceptable.

I  I stated that there were things we did not debate but accepted. The debate changed what we accepted.

Women gained right to vote in 1902 and in all states 1911

We had to change to the law to ensure women were given a chance to be paid properly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap_in_Australia and did this in the 70's.

Up to 1963 in Australia:

women were banned from entering the public bar.

I think that is all very offensive, as is the fact women are paid less than men to play tennis and are not permitted to play 5 sets at a major, which they are all capable off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

I think that is all very offensive, as is the fact women are paid less than men to play tennis and are not permitted to play 5 sets at a major, which they are all capable off.

And I would disagree that a small mismatch between the number of sets played in a few major tennis tournaments is in any way equal to systemic violent racism...By drawing the comparison you suggest an equivalence. I don't think we're fundamentally disagreeing but I just think the comparison you used is innapropriate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×