A George W. Bush appointed federal judge has dismissed the claims for equal pay by the US women‘s national soccer team in a crushing defeat for the world champion team.
Claims of unequal travel conditions and support services can still go to trial.
The women were seeking $66 million in damages under the Equal Pay Act.
We will never stop fighting for EQUALITY.
— Megan Rapinoe (@mPinoe) May 2, 2020
Spokesperson Molly Levinson tweeted:
1/2 We are shocked and disappointed with today’s decision, but we will not give up our hard work for equal pay. We are confident in our case and steadfast in our commitment to ensuring that girls and women will not be valued as lesser just because of their gender.
2/2 We have learned that there are tremendous obstacles to change; we know that it takes bravery and courage and perseverance to stand up to them. We will appeal and press on. Words cannot express our gratitude to all who support us.
Yahoo reports a federal judge dismissed the United States women’s soccer team’s bid for equal pay on Friday, rejecting claims the players had been underpaid in a crushing defeat for the reigning world champions.
In a 32-page ruling, Judge Gary Klausner of the US District Court for Central California in Los Angeles tossed the women’s claim of pay discrimination, ruling in favour of the United States Soccer Federation.
Klausner did allow the women’s case for unfair treatment in areas such as travel, housing and medical support to proceed to trial, set for June 16 in Los Angeles.
But the judge said the equal pay claims — the central plank of the case — had been dismissed because there was evidence the women had turned down an offer to be paid along the lines of the US men’s team.
“The history of negotiations between the parties demonstrates that the WNT rejected an offer to be paid under the same pay-to-play structure as the MNT, and the WNT was willing to forgo higher bonuses for benefits, such as greater base compensation and the guarantee of a higher number of contracted players,” Klausner wrote.
“Accordingly, plaintiffs cannot now retroactively deem their CBA (collective bargaining agreement) worse than the MNT CBA by reference to what they would have made had they been paid under the MNT’s pay-to-play terms structure when they themselves rejected such a structure,” he said.