As an American, I am incredibly proud that our Women’s National Team has, once again, won the World Cup. As a compensation professional, I have had enough. When our country’s (and the world’s) best team in one of the truly international sports cannot be remunerated at least equal to a less-accomplished men’s team, we have the foundation of a problem that seemingly only compensation pros can fix. This article is not about facts and figures (there are links to those at the end). This is about what it takes to accomplish gender equity (and what that actually means) even after you have the facts.
As I have written before, equity is not about being equal. And as I have covered many, many times before, I am a true proponent of performance-based pay. Call it variable, call it personalized, call it incentive pay. Whatever you call it, I have made the argument that some people should get paid far more than others. This is not about women getting paid "80% of men.” This is not about politics. This is about just rewards being delivered when earned.
We have heard Sheryl Sandberg tell women to Lean In. We have heard Sallie Krawcheck talk about women “owning it” and working hard. We have heard about CEOs who have spent time and money fixing this problem at their companies. Psychologists have opined that women are less aggressive negotiators. Pundits in the media have told women they need to demand better pay. But what happens when you do all of these things and imbalance still exists?
One of the current excuses focuses on the men’s bringing in more revenue. This is true if the period of measurement is properly cherry-picked. It is also not true if the date range is shorter (like an annual incentive plan or salary). But revenue is not the point of a national team. Representing the country honorably and winning as many games as possible is the goal of any national team. So, revenue is out.
Some argue the men receive greater viewership. This cannot be measured without including the fact that many are watching the OTHER team. South American, Asian, European African and even Oceanic teams all have fans around the world. How many are watching “ours” and how many are watching “theirs?” So, viewing ratings are out.
Lastly, some argue that the gap “isn’t that big.” The size of the gap is not the issue, the existence of the gap is an issue.
I once had a boss who taught me an important phrase: “That’s a great excuse, but a terrible reason.” And excuses are all we have for the pay inequity of the most accomplished international sports team the US has delivered in the past 40 or 50 years. Who cares if they are paid “equally?” There are no legitimate reasons they aren’t paid MORE than the men’s team. And, that’s the real issue for compensation professional. This isn’t about soccer, it’s about pay.
If we cannot expect this team to be paid for their performance, how convincing can we possibly be when we claim that ANYONE is being paid for their performance? (I know, I know, some of you work at companies that have fixed this problem, but you are still the minority.) More importantly, if this is such a difficult thing to fix for a group of fewer than 30 women, how can most companies expect to fix pay issues for much, much larger groups?
OK. Rant over. I recommend fixing this tomorrow and moving forward quickly to ensure it isn’t a problem again. There are no reasons that can’t happen, only excuses.
Some related articles for your reading pleasure:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvFYQ2sz2pw
Dan Walter is a CECP, CEP, and Fellow of Global Equity (FGE). He works as Managing Consultant for FutureSense. He is passionately committed to aligning pay with company strategy and culture. Dan is also a leading expert on equity compensation issues and has written several industry resources including the one-of-a-kind Performance-Based Equity Compensation. He has co-authored ”Everything You Do In Compensation is Communication”, “The Decision Makers Guide to Equity Compensation”, “Equity Alternatives” and other books. Connect with Dan on LinkedIn. Or, follow him on Twitter at @DanFutureSense.
Here, here! If ever there was a clear pay discrepancy, this is it. The "excuse" I read was that the men's world cup bonus pool far exceeds what the women's bonus pool is. While the US can't fix that, they certainly can divvy up those pools as they wish - and they should give the larger percentage to the team currently doing better - the women's team. Should that change in future, fine, it gets divvied up to favor the men's team. But for now, there is a way to fix it. They just want to keep their excuses. Thanks, Dan.
Posted by: Molly S | 07/10/2019 at 09:57 AM
Thanks for the comment Molly. From what I understand the bonus pools for both teams are negotiated by the organization and the representatives of the teams. The fact is that no one has served these women properly. They should be paid more than men while they are performing better than men. and vice versa.
Posted by: Dan Walter | 07/10/2019 at 11:12 AM
What is the difference in base pay? That is in direct control of the USA Federation.
What is the ad revenue and per game attendance for the Men's World Cup series vs the Women's World Cup series? That determines the bonus pool.
Posted by: steve dunn | 07/17/2019 at 09:31 AM
Thanks for the comment, Steve. I wish the calculations were that easy. Base pay differs. The men essentially get no base pay. Some women do, others do not. The crowd sizes and ad revenue is more complicated. First, the ad and sponsorship monies are mostly pooled. Second, the revenue from ads, sponsorships and game attendance for the men are driven more by who they are playing than that they are playing. huge percentages of the crowds at men's games are there in support of the "other" team. When the women play the crowds are nearly 100% in support of the US team. In the end, all of this does n ot explain away the pay differential.
Posted by: Dan Walter | 07/17/2019 at 11:52 AM