NRL retains top-30 roster system as salary cap cut by 10 per cent

[BELMORE]

Do the NRL have the power to reduce players wages by 10% ? Would this be considered restraint of trade?

This year was different because players had to agree to cuts or there was not going to be any pay.. but if next year goes ahead as per normal , the players may not be so compliant next year??

I really have no idea, just speculation..

I know companies that have cut wages between 20% and 60%. I don’t know the legal behind it but they are allowed. If you speak up then you just get a severance package I think lol

 

[Moey]

So we wait all these years. Clear our roster. Build a war chest, only for Cap to go down... such is the Bulldogs luck, but could be a blessing in disguise if clubs have to shed players. But on the downside, it would be even harder to move on fringe FG players if they are still contracted on pre-covid money..

 

[steeliz]

Every player will get their new amount (-10%). It is a deduction across the board. All you're saying is we should pay overs. We can already do that under the current salary cap. Nothing changes. We'll still offer the same % of overs that we would of on the old salary cap.

Do the NRL have the power to reduce players wages by 10% ? Would this be considered restraint of trade?

This year was different because players had to agree to cuts or there was not going to be any pay.. but if next year goes ahead as per normal , the players may not be so compliant next year??

I really have no idea, just speculation..

The only way the value of a contract can be changed is if both parties agree.

The NRL can lower the salary cap but it does not have the power to lower club contract values.

If clubs do lower contract values and the player does not agree, then the club can be sued in court for the difference plus damages.

Best alternative would be a collective bargaining agreement with the RLPA but that would not cover non-union members.

 

[GDR]

I know companies that have cut wages between 20% and 60%. I don’t know the legal behind it but they are allowed. If you speak up then you just get a severance package I think lol

It's different in professional sports when you have another party will to pay more.. for us normal folk I doubt anyone is fighting to pay us more money lol..

 

[Natboy]

All the dominoes will start to fall now

 

[BELMORE]

All the dominoes will start to fall now

Any good ones?

 

[no1bulldog]

Meat lovers & vegan

 

[capt obvious]

Can work in our favour, teams are going to squeeze players out to fit the cap, there is going to be a lot of movement, us the warriors dragons and tiggers will benefit, if we can land the right ones.

 

[bradyk]

The only way the value of a contract can be changed is if both parties agree.

The NRL can lower the salary cap but it does not have the power to lower club contract values.

If clubs do lower contract values and the player does not agree, then the club can be sued in court for the difference plus damages.

Best alternative would be a collective bargaining agreement with the RLPA but that would not cover non-union members.

We don't know that exactly. Coronavirus has changed the game. I'd be surprised if the NRL didn't have something in place in the contracts for something bizarre like these times. I actually heard the opposite, something like an "act of god" clause. Also if they can't force the 10% reductions across the board (which is actually fair imo, when you compare it to the rest of the world) then I don't see any players, at least not the majority, taking a pay cut which would mean it's almost silly to even suggest the 10% pay cut. Another way around it is the players are guaranteed to be paid the difference they've lost over future years (when times are better). If we use Brandon Smith as an e.g. let's say he's on 400k at the Storm. That'd turn into 360k given the 10% pay cut. If we were going to offer 800k (a 400k difference) before the salary cap reduced, we're not going to offer 800k after. We'll instead offer around 720k (360k difference). That's to reflect the new salary cap, the % will stay the same, it'll just be a different amount. I just really don't see what changes.

 

[albatross]

Assuming a proportional pay cut across the squad (or just those above minimum wage?), some quality players might look to avoid a pay cut by moving to clubs who can afford their current salary. This cuts our alleged available $3 mill by about a million, but puts us in a better position to pick up a decent player or two, because most other clubs have less to spend. The downsides are we could pay overs for the wrong players, and mercenary type players just looking for money maybe aren't the best people to get.

 

[XR6T]

The only knock on effect is it might mean we lose a solid player to Union, or the motherland (if ESL keep their system in tact with marquees).

Didn't know the ESL was in Kakistan.....

 

[steeliz]

We don't know that exactly. Coronavirus has changed the game. I'd be surprised if the NRL didn't have something in place in the contracts for something bizarre like these times. I actually heard the opposite, something like an "act of god" clause. Also if they can't force the 10% reductions across the board (which is actually fair imo, when you compare it to the rest of the world) then I don't see any players, at least not the majority, taking a pay cut which would mean it's almost silly to even suggest the 10% pay cut. Another way around it is the players are guaranteed to be paid the difference they've lost over future years (when times are better). If we use Brandon Smith as an e.g. let's say he's on 400k at the Storm. That'd turn into 360k given the 10% pay cut. If we were going to offer 800k (a 400k difference) before the salary cap reduced, we're not going to offer 800k after. We'll instead offer around 720k (360k difference). That's to reflect the new salary cap, the % will stay the same, it'll just be a different amount. I just really don't see what changes.

We do know that exactly.

It is federal law.

Baring an enterprise bargaining agreement, an individual agreement between both parties or an act of parliament, it is illegal for employers to reduce the income of any employee for the length of the agreed upon signed contract. When that contract has run its course then they re-negotiate.

Just because they are footballers does not mean they are outside the industrial law of the country.

Same reason their wages will never be published until there is an agreement or the Privacy Act is changed.

 

[chisdog]

Nasheed here,
Some may remember me from the Sue thread I made.
Pleased to meet you if I haven't spoken to you yet.

For me, this all depends how the players contract works.

Are all players getting their full contracted salary? And any other signings need to be made with adjustment.

Or, and this is how I strongly suspect it be, is it written in their contracts that every player will simply be pro rata'ed 10% less?

Surely it's the second.

Otherwise I think some teams are well and truly over 90% of the cal already, since the NRL dictates teams need to always be spending 95% of the salary cap

When was the last time a team was fined for spending below the salary cap though. I know clubs in the AFL have been

 

[chisdog]

Do the NRL have the power to reduce players wages by 10% ? Would this be considered restraint of trade?

This year was different because players had to agree to cuts or there was not going to be any pay.. but if next year goes ahead as per normal , the players may not be so compliant next year??

I really have no idea, just speculation..

I would suggest that the NRL lawyers have put something in there about significant circumstances that affect the revenue of the game. The CBA between the NRLPA & the NRL have a clause about spending a certain percentage of revenue on player's salaries. They all must be very thankful that Todd Greenturd left the game in such a wonderful financial position.

 

[MichaelM]

If they are keen to retain talent and manage the impact of Covid they also need to consider the age competitions I.e moving Jersey Flegg to U21’s - tough situation for young players to be graded into the Canterbury Cup plus existing CC players get squeezed out.

 

[AlzzBulldog]

All the dominoes will start to fall now

So your implying that we trying our luck with a chance to get players being released from other clubs instead of planning well in advance?

 

[bradyk]

So your implying that we trying our luck with a chance to get players being released from other clubs instead of planning well in advance?

With how long is left until the 2022 season, yes.

 

[ATT]

If they are keen to retain talent and manage the impact of Covid they also need to consider the age competitions I.e moving Jersey Flegg to U21’s - tough situation for young players to be graded into the Canterbury Cup plus existing CC players get squeezed out.

Agree but make under 21s under 23s.

 

[Natboy]

So your implying that we trying our luck with a chance to get players being released from other clubs instead of planning well in advance?

Why not do both?

 

[NPC83]

Why not do both?

Exactly why you keep a bit in the kitty for that mid season or off season transfer.