On a day the initial deadline for a new pay deal expired, AFL players were left seething by a $1.09 billion offer from league headquarters and the decision by Andrew Demetriou to reveal publicly they had rejected this figure.
ON A day the initial deadline for a new pay deal expired, AFL players were left seething by a $1.09 billion offer from league headquarters and the decision by Andrew Demetriou to reveal publicly they had rejected this figure.
AFL Players Association chief executive Matt Finnis rejected the offer on May 31 but players had respected a request from the AFL not to reveal specific details of the offer.
The AFL last night told The Age it had since increased the offer as part of an ''overall framework'' of pay and benefits. However, the association said the league had not specified a figure on this deal, only to claim it would rise by more than 3 per cent annually.
The squabbling represented a further breakdown in relations between the AFL brass and its players after Demetriou, the league chief executive, announced his offer in May was worth $279 million more than the current five-year deal.
Demetriou said the players could spend the money how they pleased. The players have been pushing for a pay rise and to improve injury compensation, superannuation and post-career support programs, including the introduction of a pension scheme.
''The package that we have offered is around $1.1 billion and that really equates to the [new] broadcast rights, what the cash component is of all the broadcast rights. It's for the players to determine how they want to apportion that,'' Demetriou said.
''We will sit down and have that dialogue [with the AFLPA] and it will be meaningful and constructive.''
However, the players' association said the league's pay offer would mean it could not update or implement injury compensation and other such schemes as 82 per cent of the money would already be allocated to the player wages bill at the 18 teams from next season.
The AFL has costed the association pay rise and additional plans at $1.32 billion.
When the two parties will meet again is unclear. Demetriou is about to go on holiday for a fortnight, although operations manager Adrian Anderson remains in charge of discussions, while the players' association made its displeasure clear in a statement last night.
"The AFL CEO has today released details of his initial $1.09 billion offer to the players, which featured salary cap increases for each club which would barely keep pace with inflation,'' the association said.
''Over 80 per cent of that amount would be taken up by merely continuing the current benefits for players across 18 teams without any increases at all in player payments. This means there would be insufficient funds for initiatives such as annuities and improved injury compensation for players.''
The players reaffirmed Finnis's decision to reject the offer at their rally on Wednesday night.
The two parties also remain at loggerheads over the length of the new collective bargaining agreement. The players want a three-year term the AFL wants five years.
''Refashioning this offer by presenting it as a global figure does nothing to change the players' view,'' the association said.
''In fact, because it includes the wages bill of the two new teams, it confirms their belief that the AFL is effectively asking them to underwrite expansion through accepting lower wages.''
The AFL has argued that it has created 100 new jobs, through expansion, for players who will share in average earnings of $249,239 while an additional ninth match per round from next season has added an estimated $150 million in cash for the players to share in.
The players rejected Demetriou's claim that the league had discovered only yesterday that they were willing to exclude an initial bid for a share of government capital grants. The AFL countered by claiming the players would only do this if their percentage formula was agreed on.
The players are after a fixed 25 per cent to 27 per cent of overall revenue over the next three years, about $220 million a year.
Demetriou again rejected the players' bid for a set percentage link to overall revenue but did not think there would be a need to seek mediation with Fair Work Australia. ''We've got a mediator, it's called the AFL Commission,'' Demetriou said.
The players voted on Wednesday to explore industrial action, which could include reducing interaction with the media and club sponsors. But they have ruled out striking.
Frequently Asked Questions about this Article…
What was the AFL's initial pay offer and why did it anger players?
The AFL publicly revealed an initial $1.09 billion offer (later described as around $1.1 billion) to the players. Players and the AFL Players Association were angered because the AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou disclosed the figure publicly after the association had respected a request not to reveal details, and the association says more than 80% of the package would simply continue current payments across 18 clubs, leaving little room for improved injury compensation, superannuation or post-career support.
Who are the key people involved in the AFL pay negotiations?
The negotiations feature AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou, who announced the league's offer, and AFL Players Association chief executive Matt Finnis, who rejected the initial offer. Operations manager Adrian Anderson was noted as remaining in charge of discussions while Demetriou was about to go on holiday.
What improvements are AFL players asking for in the new pay deal?
Players want a pay rise plus better injury compensation, increased superannuation, stronger post-career support programs (including proposals for a pension scheme or annuities), and a fixed revenue-share link to overall league revenue.
How much would the players like as a share of overall AFL revenue?
Players are seeking a fixed revenue share of about 25 to 27 per cent of overall AFL revenue over the next three years, which the article says would amount to roughly $220 million a year.
Why does the AFL Players Association say the league's package is insufficient for new player benefits?
The association argues that because over 80% of the AFL's packaged figure would be absorbed by simply continuing current benefits and the wages bill across 18 teams, there would be insufficient funds left to introduce initiatives such as annuities, improved injury compensation, or other enhanced post-career programs.
What is the disagreement over the length of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA)?
The players want a three-year CBA term to allow more flexibility, while the AFL is pushing for a five-year agreement. That difference remains a key sticking point in talks.
What additional revenue sources or changes does the AFL cite to support its offer?
The AFL points to new broadcast rights cash (which they say largely underpins the around $1.1 billion package), expansion that created about 100 new playing jobs with average earnings cited at $249,239, and the introduction of an additional ninth match per round next season that the AFL estimates added about $150 million in cash for players to share.
Could players take industrial action, and what form might it take?
Players voted to explore industrial action but have ruled out striking. Potential actions could include reducing interaction with the media and with club sponsors as leverage during negotiations.
Call 1300 880 160
Start a chat
Schedule a call
