ANPA / NA negotiations break down

ANPA / NA negotiations break down2023-11-29T15:09:56+10:00
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 72 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Avatar photoIan Harkin
    Moderator
      Post count: 21518

      Interview with ANPA President Jo Weston…

      Avatar photoIan Harkin
      Moderator
        Post count: 21518

        StatsNerd21
        Participant
          Post count: 495

          In my opinion, what the players are asking for is mostly fair- the partnership model and sharing only OVER the forecast revenue seems justified, but I think they just need to take the 11% pay raise rather than the 15%.

          I can’t see NA putting out a better offer than this, which is pretty generous! I think players should just take this and try again in 2026, I didn’t expect NA to compromise so much to be honest.

          I really can’t believe they’re not willing to take this!

          Kerryn
          Participant
            Post count: 371

            it would be interesting to know just how many of the ’80’ players have rejected the offer, I’m fairly sure nearly anyone with a job of any sort would jump at the chance of having that sort of pay rise (and even that pay for not a ‘typical’ standard full time job)

            I’m sure there are 80 other players from around Australia and the rest of the world that would more than happily play for what is being offered, and would actually be really enjoyable to watch

            Avatar photoIan Harkin
            Moderator
              Post count: 21518

              It’s amazing how the way things are said can change the way you see things. 11% pay rise? Sounds pretty damn good to me. BUT… apparently, that’s just for players on the minimum wage, not overall?

              netballmum
              Participant
                Post count: 99

                What has NA offered that wasn’t rejected 8+ weeks ago? To talk about the thing the players want (revenue share) once they have returned to work?
                I think a few too many people have been sucked in by the spin and the splashing of “11% rise”, and “back pay” and “we care about our players” as key things rather than addressing the major sticking point which has been an issue for months (if not years).
                When I listened to Kelly Ryan it was all spin and no substance. She couldn’t explain how this addressed the revenue share issue, nor could she answer how the board was paid so much more than the players!
                The step up into a PR war is interesting and presumably means that mediation is off the table (is this because NA won’t release financial details as players have also been requesting?)

                netballgirl
                Participant
                  Post count: 353

                  I want to see strategic plans from both ampa and na.

                  Why NA thinks the revenue share is a bad idea and why AMPA thinks it’s a good idea and how they’ll implement a better revenue.

                  They are both hiding from the fine print. Let us know the fine details.

                  Also athletes get government benefits especially ones on a rookie salary.

                  A medium wage of 84k is amazing, there are people out there earning 40k a year with a family of 4. I’m not saying the players don’t deserve more money but this sport isn’t at the point to place million dollar salaries.

                  Stoj
                  Participant
                    Post count: 115

                    The 11% is over 3 years, so roughly 3-4% per year. Inflation atm is hovering around 5%. That means in real terms they’re actually taking a pay cut if they take the deal. That should not be on.

                    My union has recently agreed to a similar deal to avoid the publicity and it sucks. Since when did we allow big corporations to run the entire pretty much everything, with the rest of us pandering to their every whim.

                    Avatar photoIan Harkin
                    Moderator
                      Post count: 21518

                      Interview with Kelly Ryan…

                      Avatar photoIan Harkin
                      Moderator
                        Post count: 21518

                        Press release from ANPA…

                        Avatar photoIan Harkin
                        Moderator
                          Post count: 21518

                          TB
                          Participant
                            Post count: 1114

                            Not a good look for NA. It feels like they are playing on the fact that players have not been paid for 8 weeks, and hoping they’ve become desperate and willing to take any type of offer (or an offer that “appears” good).

                            It’s like getting a group of people together and not feeding them for 8 days. And then you dangle a piece of meat/food in front of them, they become so desperate they fight for whatever scraps they can get from this bit of food.

                            I’m glad these players have stood their ground, and have stayed strong. I’m sure there’s some out there who could be in that “desperate” stage.

                            • This reply was modified 3 months ago by TB.
                            Avatar photoIan Harkin
                            Moderator
                              Post count: 21518

                              So, apparently, this is the sticking point. All the players are asking for is 20% of any sponsorship money which is above the amount forecast.

                              Kath Harby-Williams explained… “If the sport is lucky enough to generate an extra $200,000 above forecast, new money, excess money, whatever you call it, then players at a 20% rate would share $40,000 with the entire group.”

                              So, in that instance, 80 athletes would get just $500 each. You could think that hardly seems worth the fuss, but clearly, the better that the competition does, the more sponsorship money comes in and the more money the players will receive. But so will NA. It just seems like a no-brainer. It’s not an outlandish request.

                              Netballcrazy1
                              Participant
                                Post count: 2357

                                I think both sides have some word to do but particular NA.

                                NA has been, from the start, very vague about the terms they use when talking about their offers and mislead the public . I’m also curious as to why they won’t hand over the books to ANPA. Obviously money must be going somewhere and they don’t wanna disclose.

                                NB12
                                Participant
                                  Post count: 527

                                  Gosh – I jumped the gun when I said this was an excellent offer. 11% rise to the minimum wage is not how NA presented it in their release, or I misread it.

                                  It is correct that netball is not a wealthy sport but people need to keep in mind these athletes will need a career and a job when they are no longer playing. The salaries they are on now is not enough to be setting them up for later down the track so they need every opportunity they can to get ahead in the now. If revenue sharing is something that will help that in the now, then I’m all for it.

                                Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 72 total)
                                • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
                                Go to Top