How the Danish union secured full payment for their Women’s World Cup players – in addition to the FIFA/FIFPRO prize money

• A total pot of USD 110m was distributed by FIFA to every Women’s World Cup player based on performance at the tournament
  
  
• Because of that prize money pot from FIFA, the Danish Football Association initially refused to pay their own prize money, as outlined in their CBA, to their players
  
  
• Spillerforeningen CEO Michael Sahl Hansen discusses how the Danish union successfully challenged the federation to ensure their women’s national team players received what they were rightfully owed

Danish union Spillerforeningen successfully secured full payment for women’s national team players as laid down by their collective bargaining agreement (CBA) – in addition to the sum set out in the FIFA/FIFPRO Women’s World Cup prize money agreement.

FIFA distributed a total pot of USD 110m to every Women’s World Cup player based on performance at the global finals, with every individual earning at least USD 30,000 and each Spanish player receiving USD 270,000 as winners of the tournament. The prize pot was secured on the back of the largest piece of collective action ever undertaken by FIFPRO, member unions, and over 150 international players from 25 countries.

Denmark’s run to the Round of 16 entitled all 23 Danish players to each receive prize money of USD 60,000 from FIFA. On the basis that players were already receiving the FIFA payments, the Danish Football Association (DBU) initially refused to pay the additional prize money in full that was agreed in the CBA with Spillerforeningen.

The Danish union, however, fought relentlessly to secure what was rightfully owed to the players and earlier this month reached an agreement with DBU that means these players received 100 percent of the prize money as outlined in their CBA.

FIFPRO caught up with Spillerforeningen CEO Michael Sahl Hansen to hear how the Danish union successfully ensured that their women’s national team players received what they were rightfully owed.

FIFPRO: Michael, can you tell us how this situation came about?

Michael Sahl Hansen: We have a CBA with the federation, and we have written terms about how much the players will receive in prize money in relation to tournaments such as the EURO and the World Cup. This was before the collective action that secured the FIFA/FIFPRO prize money for players. We told the federation that we, of course, were still sticking to the existing agreement between us and the FA, so they needed to pay the prize money that was previously set out in the CBA in addition to the earmarked prize money from FIFA. At first, they didn't agree with us. They said the players were receiving prize money from FIFA, so they wouldn’t be paying the money set out in the CBA, and they came with examples of other national federations that were also doing the same. But we had fixed numbers in our CBA, and we were firm that the previously agreed terms should be in addition to the prize money from FIFA, and the players felt the same.

This was before the Women’s World Cup and when it got to a week before the players were due to depart for Australia, the federation reached out to try and negotiate a partial figure. We were clear that the players wanted the full amount that was agreed. We then delayed talks until after the tournament as by that stage, we wanted to give the players space; we wanted the players to be able to concentrate solely on football.

How did you eventually solve this with the federation after the tournament?

We made it clear to the federation that the FIFA/FIFPRO prize money was nothing to do with them – that was money that the players fought for themselves, and that money was coming from FIFA. We also made it clear to the federation that they were also getting more money from FIFA because of the agreement. So, if there is more investment coming into the federation, then they have a better chance to pay the prize money that was previously outlined in the CBA. They also had it in their budget that they needed to pay this prize money for the women’s players before they knew about the FIFA/FIFPRO prize money coming in, so it made no sense to deduct money from the CBA.

We’re also looking at the men’s CBA currently and, in these meetings, the federation have been talking about equal pay. So, for them to then deny the women’s players their full salary, it’s rather contradictory and not a good look for them. We also used some of the federation’s arguments against them. For instance, in the past, the federation have not wanted to increase prize money because they have said there is already a written agreement in place. Well, we were sticking to this written agreement…

What advice would you give to other unions who might be experiencing the same process currently?

I think the best advice is to put the figures on the table. Federations often talk about having closed budgets, that they cannot invest more money. Yet, before the World Cup, they had made budgets for how much prize money they can pay the players. When new money then comes in from FIFA that wasn’t budgeted for, they are in a better position to pay the women’s players what they are owed. We also told them we would not go public during the negotiations, that we trusted them to solve this. We also had the backing of the players, who wanted to solve this through dialogue.

It is also important for member unions to stick together and share best practice because federations are collaborating at their level. When we fill out the MDAS, we should share our CBA because it harms us as unions if we don't have the full picture and if the federations have all the information. When that happens, we don't have the same opportunity to secure the best agreement for the players. It can harm us if the federations have a higher level of knowledge in terms of CBAs, payments and so on.

What has been the reaction of the players since they received what they were rightfully owed

When we first told them that the federation were refusing to pay, they were naturally not happy. But they wanted to solve this through dialogue behind closed doors. The players didn’t want to have to go on strike again. The players were happy with the end result, and they were especially happy about the work done by FIFPRO, member unions, and international players in securing better World Cup conditions.

It’s always an education especially for the young players, who maybe don't know so much about what we as unions are doing. This is an opportunity to show why we are here for them, and we can achieve goals when we work together.