The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute

[ensco]

4 hours ago, Kent said:

Except the suits for the executives are for the World Cup, and the players were asked to return training gear for non-World Cup. The executives will keep their World Cup suits, and I'm guessing the players will keep their World Cup jerseys.

The suits/training gear issue brought up in the article seems bad, but if you think about it for a minute or two it's easy to see it's not like for like.

OK I have thought about for a minute or two. 

In what executive job do you get to have your clothes bought for you?

In what elite sports context do players not get to keep the gear they wear on the field/court?

_________

(This is as depressing a thread as I have read around here in years of lurking)

Edited October 26, 2022 by ensco

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

You would almost get the impression certain posters are paid shills if you viewed this thread in isolation but it's probably more that CanPL and the CSA gets wrapped up with a my country right or wrong nationalist sort of mindset with some people.

[Obinna]

8 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

You would almost get the impression certain posters are paid shills if you viewed this thread in isolation but it's probably more that CanPL and the CSA gets wrapped up with a my country right or wrong nationalist sort of mindset with some people.

My country right or wrong nationalist mindset?

[Obinna]

46 minutes ago, ensco said:

OK I have thought about for a minute or two. 

In what executive job do you get to have your clothes bought for you?

In what elite sports context do players not get to keep the gear they wear on the field/court?

_________

(This is as depressing a thread as I have read around here in years of lurking)

Sounds like you may need to take more than a few minutes 😂

(sorry, I couldn't resist haha)

[Obinna]

55 minutes ago, ensco said:

In what elite sports context do players not get to keep the gear they wear on the field/court?

I've noticed many teams in CONCACAF do not list the name of the player on the back of the jersey, just the number, and perhaps this is because the jerseys will get re-used (i.e. the players don't get to keep them).

IF that is standard practice (I don't know if it is or not), the CSA would be just doing the same as other federations, right?

And if THAT is the case, should there be any hoopla about not returning gear? I would say no. 

Had Westhead said something like....

"it's common practice for teams in CONCACAF/FIFA to let players keep jerseys, however we've learned from our source that CSA is one of the few federations not doing so, which is egregious considering executives are getting expensive tailor-made suits which we've confirmed they get to keep".

....then he would have done his due diligence and provided a fair context from which to perpetuate his narrative that the CSA are lousy. But he never did that, hence the flack he is getting. 

Hope that gets you up to speed on that side of the argument!

[Gian-Luca]

1 hour ago, ensco said:

 

In what executive job do you get to have your clothes bought for you?

_________

 

Mentioned this a few pages back but the Board of Directors for the CSA (including the President & Vice President) who got the new matching suits are not paid executives, but volunteers. The use of the term "executive job" makes it sound like this is in reference to the Chief Financial Officer, Senior Vice-President, etc. for a Fortune 500 company, which isn't exactly what we are talking about with the CSA board. Brittany Tymko is a former Woman's team player who I believe is now a women's soccer coach in BC, while Karen McNeil is a former field hockey Olympian who now is a sports psychologist. That's just two examples, but they don't exactly sound like the cigar-chomping business executives who will sit in the boardroom of a 60 story skyscraper barking at underlings by shouting "Silence! I will not tolerate your insolence!" a la Dr. Evil.

I realize that this information about the Board being volunteers, or that fact that every FA delegation that goes to the World Cup gets new matching suits or that FIFA is paying for these folks to attend the World Cup was either unwittingly or deliberately left out of the Westhead articles along with many other germane facts that several posters have alluded to in this thread, but that gets back to the issue that people have with Westhead's journalism in the Canadian soccer world.

Edited October 26, 2022 by Gian-Luca

[SpursFlu]

1 hour ago, ensco said:

OK I have thought about for a minute or two. 

In what executive job do you get to have your clothes bought for you?

In what elite sports context do players not get to keep the gear they wear on the field/court?

_________

(This is as depressing a thread as I have read around here in years of lurking)

Not to pick a fight with some other random person but go try on suits at Holt Renfrew or somewhere like that and you'll routinely see executives buying clothes on allowance or even see some purchasing clothing for them. Ironically another occupation in which people receive a clothing allowance, often for high end suits: the media. Not trying to go down this road again but just politely pointing out that it's pretty common and 11k for several custom suits is actually pretty cheap.

Edited October 26, 2022 by SpursFlu

[El Hombre]

5 minutes ago, SpursFlu said:

Not to pick a fight with some other random person but go try on suits at Holt Renfrew or somewhere like that and you'll routinely see executives buying clothes on allowance or even see some purchasing clothing for them. Ironically another occupation in which people receive a clothing allowance, often for high end suits: the media. Not trying to go down this road again but just politely pointing out that it's pretty common and 11k for several custom suits is actually pretty cheap. Ironically dum dum dum.. I just went to a high profile wedding of two media members lol so I splashed on a new suit 2k

I call bullshit on executives of companies with similar budgets as the CSA getting clothing allowances.  As one, I get a sporty polo shirt that if you consider "size: large" as bespoke, then I guess it would be tailored by the fine folks at Gildan Inc.

You'd either have to be an executive in a much higher revenue organization or one with incredibly high profit margins.  Not a non-profit like the CSA.

Nevertheless, the whole suit thing is overblown as a legitimate gripe.  However, the fact that it is even being discussed is a result of the CSA being incredibly tone-deaf/incompetent.  Whoever green-lit that little 60 or 90 second clip doesn't appreciate the gravity of the situation.  And that is what has me most worried about this ever getting resolved amicably or expediently.

[SpursFlu]

7 minutes ago, El Hombre said:

I call bullshit on executives of companies with similar budgets as the CSA getting clothing allowances.  As one, I get a sporty polo shirt that if you consider "size: large" as bespoke, then I guess it would be tailored by the fine folks at Gildan Inc.

You'd either have to be an executive in a much higher revenue organization or one with incredibly high profit margins.  Not a non-profit like the CSA.

Nevertheless, the whole suit thing is overblown as a legitimate gripe.  However, the fact that it is even being discussed is a result of the CSA being incredibly tone-deaf/incompetent.  Whoever green-lit that little 60 or 90 second clip doesn't appreciate the gravity of the situation.  And that is what has me most worried about this ever getting resolved amicably or expediently.

But I don't appreciate the supposed gravity of the situation. So I don't blame them

So when TSN sends reporters to the World Cup to do live hits or whatever they're up to. Are they wearing suits they paid for on their own dime?

[Obinna]

21 minutes ago, El Hombre said:

I call bullshit on executives of companies with similar budgets as the CSA getting clothing allowances.  As one, I get a sporty polo shirt that if you consider "size: large" as bespoke, then I guess it would be tailored by the fine folks at Gildan Inc.

You'd either have to be an executive in a much higher revenue organization or one with incredibly high profit margins.  Not a non-profit like the CSA.

Nevertheless, the whole suit thing is overblown as a legitimate gripe.  However, the fact that it is even being discussed is a result of the CSA being incredibly tone-deaf/incompetent.  Whoever green-lit that little 60 or 90 second clip doesn't appreciate the gravity of the situation.  And that is what has me most worried about this ever getting resolved amicably or expediently.

I agree with your overall point, but I would push back on the bolded part with a question (for you or anyone to answer): If the CSA had the revenue of the USSF, would that justify the cost of the suits (let's put aside the cringy video they released)?

[Obinna]

25 minutes ago, El Hombre said:

Whoever green-lit that little 60 or 90 second clip doesn't appreciate the gravity of the situation.  And that is what has me most worried about this ever getting resolved amicably or expediently.

And by the way, I am in full agreement with this, and I share your concerns here. 

[SpursFlu]

4 minutes ago, Obinna said:

And by the way, I am in full agreement with this, and I share your concerns here. 

Right but what if the CSA 3 weeks from now have a similar video planned of the players having fun getting their custom made Canada suits. How funny would that be? They just walked the gumba parade right in to a brick wall. That would be a beauty

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

My country right or wrong nationalist mindset?

The "intercourse with nations" one, you know.

 

[Unnamed Trialist]

57 minutes ago, Gian-Luca said:

 That's just two examples, but they don't exactly sound like the cigar-chomping business executives who will sit in the boardroom of a 60 story skyscraper barking at underlings by shouting "Silence! I will not tolerate your insolence!" a la Dr. Evil.

Are you saying you let people smoke in your Toronto offices?

[WestHamCanadianinOxford]

23 minutes ago, Obinna said:

I agree with your overall point, but I would push back on the bolded part with a question (for you or anyone to answer): If the CSA had the revenue of the USSF, would that justify the cost of the suits (let's put aside the cringy video they released)?

Do you know when the actual video was released? I have only seen it shared. 

 

I do agree, if this mattered to more people, the "James Bond" exclamation would be a cringe meme by now. 

[Gian-Luca]

55 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Are you saying you let people smoke in your Toronto offices?

Smoking no, chomping yes

[Watchmen]

1 hour ago, SpursFlu said:

Right but what if the CSA 3 weeks from now have a similar video planned of the players having fun getting their custom made Canada suits. How funny would that be?

Well they were going to do that but Nota Bene told them they'd missed the 18 month lead time deadline so...

[DoyleG]

3 hours ago, El Hombre said:

I call bullshit on executives of companies with similar budgets as the CSA getting clothing allowances.  As one, I get a sporty polo shirt that if you consider "size: large" as bespoke, then I guess it would be tailored by the fine folks at Gildan Inc.

You'd either have to be an executive in a much higher revenue organization or one with incredibly high profit margins.  Not a non-profit like the CSA.

If you have responsibilities to represent a company well in the public sphere, then you will have such allowances.

Even government agencies have such clothing allowances.

[VinceA]

 

[Kadenge]

13 minutes ago, VinceA said:

 

......and the pressure mounts on CSA

[El Hombre]

4 hours ago, SpursFlu said:

But I don't appreciate the supposed gravity of the situation. So I don't blame them

So when TSN sends reporters to the World Cup to do live hits or whatever they're up to. Are they wearing suits they paid for on their own dime?

Seriously?  TSN is a television station.  They work in a visual medium.  Of course wardrobe will be part of their budget.  Just like any local news station, network soap opera or movie.  Or did you expect all the Game of Thrones actors to provide their own suit of armor?  Maybe Mr. Millar can shed some light on whether that was the case or not.

To equate wardrobe costs of on-air talent for a television station with wardrobe costs of a board of directors of a governmental non-profit takes such mental gymnastics that I'm not even sure what we're arguing any more.

[ensco]

5 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

Mentioned this a few pages back but the Board of Directors for the CSA (including the President & Vice President) who got the new matching suits are not paid executives, but volunteers. The use of the term "executive job" makes it sound like this is in reference to the Chief Financial Officer, Senior Vice-President, etc. for a Fortune 500 company, which isn't exactly what we are talking about with the CSA board. Brittany Tymko is a former Woman's team player who I believe is now a women's soccer coach in BC, while Karen McNeil is a former field hockey Olympian who now is a sports psychologist. That's just two examples, but they don't exactly sound like the cigar-chomping business executives who will sit in the boardroom of a 60 story skyscraper barking at underlings by shouting "Silence! I will not tolerate your insolence!" a la Dr. Evil.

I realize that this information about the Board being volunteers, or that fact that every FA delegation that goes to the World Cup gets new matching suits or that FIFA is paying for these folks to attend the World Cup was either unwittingly or deliberately left out of the Westhead articles along with many other germane facts that several posters have alluded to in this thread, but that gets back to the issue that people have with Westhead's journalism in the Canadian soccer world.

I mean, I am utterly speechless. It's legitimate … because it is a volunteer position?

Those of us involved in volunteer or nonprofit positions (I suspect there are a few here) know how inconceivable it is for the Board of non profits to spend even $100 on blandishments for board members or executives.

 

 

[ensco]

5 hours ago, Obinna said:

I've noticed many teams in CONCACAF do not list the name of the player on the back of the jersey, just the number, and perhaps this is because the jerseys will get re-used (i.e. the players don't get to keep them).

IF that is standard practice (I don't know if it is or not), the CSA would be just doing the same as other federations, right?

And if THAT is the case, should there be any hoopla about not returning gear? I would say no. 

Had Westhead said something like....

"it's common practice for teams in CONCACAF/FIFA to let players keep jerseys, however we've learned from our source that CSA is one of the few federations not doing so, which is egregious considering executives are getting expensive tailor-made suits which we've confirmed they get to keep".

....then he would have done his due diligence and provided a fair context from which to perpetuate his narrative that the CSA are lousy. But he never did that, hence the flack he is getting. 

Hope that gets you up to speed on that side of the argument!

I actually don't think this issue is the meaningful one, but let's be reasonable: the comp set is the 32 qualifying teams. 
 

Coming back and seeing these posts dominate the convo…
 

Those are our generational heroes they are dicking over. The general unwillingness to not see the obvious here bothers me.

[Gian-Luca]

2 hours ago, ensco said:

I mean, I am utterly speechless. It's legitimate … because it is a volunteer position?

Those of us involved in volunteer or nonprofit positions (I suspect there are a few here) know how inconceivable it is for the Board of non profits to spend even $100 on blandishments for board members or executives.

 

You asked the question "In what executive job do you get to have your clothes bought for you?", I was pointing out to you that your own comparison is faulty because we aren't talking VP of Marketing and Sales for Tim Hortons or the Chief Financial Officer of Canadian Tire, or any other corporation you wish to mention. For the people we are talking about (and I even named two of them), this isn't their "executive job" to be on the board, they volunteer. They have other full or part-time jobs.

A more appropriate question to ask might be what other Football Association makes volunteers who form part of their delegation pay for FA suits when attending World Cups, Euros, Olympics, etc. I'm aware, for example, that the Italian FA (when they actually make World Cups of course) doesn't do this. Comparing it to VP of Telecommunications at Rogers or even to your average nonprofit or charitable association (leaving aside that the CSA is not a "nonprofit") that is not sending their volunteer board members to the World Cup isn't particularly helpful as a comparison. Especially since the whole issue of the suits, apart from optics, has another kind of FA - that is, Sweet FA - to do with the FIFA prize money that is at the heart of the dispute.

 

Edited October 27, 2022 by Gian-Luca

[Cheeta]

3 hours ago, VinceA said:

 

Required viewing.

Why?  Because deflections aside (Suits?  Really?  Fu'k...) the presentation boils things down nicely.  Sure, around here it's sort of preaching to the choir but it's still nice to hear it verbalized into simple sums that are the results of what are sometimes complex equations. 

The CSA, Canada Soccer, Those Guys, whatever, as an institution its engineered to fail.    Bulldoze the lot and rebuild from scratch.  The Day after the World Cup Finals finishes.  There's no more time to lose.