On Thursday, the United States Senate unanimously approved a non-binding resolution calling on the US Soccer Federation to “immediately end gender pay inequity and to treat all athletes with the respect and dignity those athletes deserve”.
It was Senator Patty Murray and other members of the Democratic Party who had introduced the resolution in early May. This was the result a complaint filed by the members of the United States women’s national soccer team asking the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to carry out an investigation as to whether the payment to athletes by the US Soccer Federation was fair and just.
That brings us to the question: is it the payment or the amount of money that the athlete earns the thing that earns him/her respect and dignity? In a scenario where the dynamics involved in both men’s football and women’s football are so far apart, is equal pay justified? The answers to those are in the negative in my opinion. The amount of viewership, fandom and commercial revenues that both versions boast of are simply too far apart.
There has been a lot of talk about bringing the amount of payments and prize money that are paid to both the genders in sports and athletics to an equal level. In my fair opinion, that should only be the case where such a claim stands to be justified by the pertinent facts and circumstances.
Let’s take the case of Grand Slam tennis for example, in which the prize money offered to both the genders was made equal a few years back owing to the huge demand and backing for the same. In tennis, such a demand does hold due merit as over the years women’s tennis has been able to garner almost as much viewership and fandom as men’s tennis.
This transition took place gradually as the popularity of women’s tennis has soared organically. It was not done through a petition or a resolution overnight. The viewership and revenue the Tennis Associations and Bodies are earning from women’s tournaments is nearly at par with the men’s tournaments.
But the same situation does not apply to the sport of football. The gap in the viewership statistics and the divide in the amount of revenues generated between men’s and women’s football is huge to say the least. To put things into perspective, the winners of the FIFA World Cup men’s edition earn a prize money of USD 35 million while the prize money for the women’s edition is USD 2 miilion. The gap between the two is evidently huge and should certainly be bridged to an extent, but these prize moneys are the way they are because of the viewership and revenue generated.
It is a well-accepted fact that payments and wages are subject to market forces of demand and supply, therefore the resolution passed on Thursday doesn’t stand justified. In fact, it sets a bad precedent for other sports bodies to follow, which they simply won’t be able to comply with.
Having said that, there is no taking away from the fact that female athletes put all their heart, soul and hard work into their respective sports. This article should not at all be construed as an attack on feminism or women's empowerment. I have the utmost respect for women and female athletes. They deserve all the respect, dignity and adulation which they so often miss out on.
But their efforts should be rewarded by equal pay only in the scenarios where it is justified by the relevant circumstances. If not, the pay that is offered to them should always be brought up to a level that is respectable and justified.
There is also no denying the fact that steps should be taken by Sports Federations and Governments across the globe to encourage women’s sports teams and individuals. They can do that by amping up the infrastructure, offering respectable pay scales and uplifting the level of women’s sports and athletics in general.
However, equity in pay with the male counterparts shouldn’t simply be introduced just because of high amount of demand or pressure for it; it should only be awarded in the sports where such a claim stands entirely justified by the circumstances surrounding it.
The gap between the two forms has to be bridged gradually in a holistic manner, not in an abrupt fashion by passing a resolution.
