Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Dr. Strange

(26,044 posts)

6. In retrospect, the women should have taken the same deal as the men's team.

Reply to Igel (Reply #5)

Sat May 2, 2020, 12:26 PM

May 2020

Hindsight is 20-20 and I do see the benefit of the deal the women's team made, but I wonder if they'll go for the other approach during the next bargaining agreement?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Judge rules against womens players in equal pay suit vs. U.S. Soccer Federation [View all] Celerity May 2020 OP

A George W judge jimfields33 May 2020 #1

Wow... shocking secondwind May 2020 #2

What is the reason behind the judgment? Or is it just plain old sexism? smirkymonkey May 2020 #3

The men and women players signed different contracts ripcord May 2020 #4

That's the "what". I always like the "why". Igel May 2020 #5

In retrospect, the women should have taken the same deal as the men's team. Dr. Strange May 2020 #6

makes sense to me. Next time the contract is up for renewal they need to demand more or not play Takket May 2020 #7

Exactly Here2Stay May 2020 #8