Jump to content

The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute


Shway

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, A_Gagne said:

Hmm... thanks for this. Didn't know it was standard for athletes (at least in basketball) to have their teams foot the tax bill. It makes sense though in a globalized sport to negotiate with players on net (post-tax) income. That would make it simpler for the player to make a decision say for instance if they were evaluating a 1M EURO contract from a Swedish vs a Greek club.

A club cant foot a player's tax bill - thats illegal. 

Whatever the player is paid will be taxable income for the player. Doesnt matter if you call it "gross" or "net", the Government gets its take. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ensco said:

Bontis leaving town is inexplicable, unless he has lost his job. The team is in the biggest crisis in its history, the players are all there, they have a game Thursday there… and he leaves?

Although the only way this gets done is without Bontis or Cochran in the room, it seems to me.

Isn't his CSA position volunteer and unpaid?

He probably had to get back to his real job

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Big_M said:

CSA is exempt, not players...players want the equivalent of 40% after taxes which is closer to 80% pre tax

yes, this is income that players are receiving and subject to the whatever rates apply to this sort of income.  

I still wonder if the govt could provide a one time exemption on taxes from this Fifa payout, in exchange for some much needed changes at CSA, and to bring back a sense of solidarity and unity going into Qatar.  

If there's any leverage the govt has, it's via this.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cornerkick said:

yes, this is income that players are receiving and subject to the whatever rates apply to this sort of income.  

I still wonder if the govt could provide a one time exemption on taxes from this Fifa payout, in exchange for some much needed changes at CSA, and to bring back a sense of solidarity and unity going into Qatar.  

If there's any leverage the govt has, it's via this.  

That would require the government to care about this much more than they probably do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, cornerkick said:

yes, this is income that players are receiving and subject to the whatever rates apply to this sort of income.  

I still wonder if the govt could provide a one time exemption on taxes from this Fifa payout, in exchange for some much needed changes at CSA, and to bring back a sense of solidarity and unity going into Qatar.  

If there's any leverage the govt has, it's via this.  

Less than zero chance; if it got out to the public (which it should), the Iranian situation would be child's play relatively speaking.   And the majority of the general public don't really care about soccer anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

Can they? Why stop there? 
 

Why is it just split equally between the men and women then? Why not include the para squad? 

That’s why I said reasonable people can disagree!  It’s not straightforward by any stretch.  They should have been studying and reviewing the implications of the US deal the moment it was released if not sooner.  And what applies in Canadian context or labor and employment practices. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, CanadaFan123 said:

Can they? Why stop there? 
 

Why is it just split equally between the men and women then? Why not include the para 

And youth squads. 

Edited by Ruud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

So why didn't we play yesterday?

The players had some leverage and were going to use it to try and renegotiate a deal they would have cut years previously, because they think CSA is giving them the shaft.  All the explayers say its decided before qualifying.  Walking out in WCQ or nations league will have serious penalties, this is also bad, but it needs to be bad from their perspective for the threat of a walkout to have any teeth, to make any changes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My concern is who came up with the proposal the players presented to the CBA.  When you talk about labour negotiations the MLB that just went through one has the MLBPA.  They are stocked with lawyers and accountants who know and understand the business economics to come up with these proposals.  Who were the lawyers and accountants that put this proposal together for the players, or did the players just have a few pints and come up with it on their own.  It's entirely possible there proposal is unreasonable and was put together with a lack of understanding of certain issues.  There needs to be clear communication, which is on the CSA.  They need to get something hammered out. 

Edited by prairiecanuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MauditYvon said:

Why did they accept the call up if it was to do that? Seriously?

I've been stating this since yesterday. 

If they were serious about not playing they should have never accepted the call up. No matter how incompetent and bungling the CSA is, the players' decision to announce they would not play on the day of the match was a huge slap in the face to the fans. They could have simply stayed home and accomplished the same thing without screwing over the fans

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...