SA Footy

With some players getting paid part time wages with dedication required being required closer to that of a full timer should there be some sort of Players Union?
Clubs seem to be able to break contracts and dump players willy nilly yet when a lot of players want to transfer to another club to earn a similar living large transfer fees are thrown on their heads (my club is as guilty of this if not moreso), which I dont think is fair.
Should there be some sort of players union or if the transfer fees situation was worked out would that be the end of most of the problems?
I personally think if a player is not wanted by a club or offered a reduction in contract by X% they should be able to go wherever they want free of charge.
A Players Union might put more pressure on the SANFL upping the salary cap further or aboloshing it altogether too.
Thoughts?

Good point though Wedgie,it is something I am sure the AFL would instigate/take control of though,making it a sub-party to the AFLPA,would be the most sensible way to do it.

what about when the state game comes up that we use that as a window for trades with other clubs?

Has been discussed before and somone brought it up on 5AA one night, I got the impression from what was being said it was all in the to hard basked for now but there was talk of some how linking it in with the AFL players association. Someone might know what ended up happening with it all. I agree that it is needed.

Go The Union. See you all at the IR meeting at Elders 30th November 8am.

Are unions allowed in Australia these days?

[quote]Are unions allowed in Australia these days? [quote]

Yes, but only if they call themselves association or chamber or institute or federation + act as the feral gov's 'stalking hourse'

An sanfl players union would be a big plus

Farmers Union is good

Not necessary and unlikely to be sustainable.

With a $3 million total player payments pool the fees would need to be at least recouping $150K to cover one salary, one car, one mobile and accommodation (yes you could say they could work from home but dont forget there are issues like filing, photocopying, storage, etc). That would require 100% of players to pay 5% membership fees each week.

In the AFL, management fees are typically based on 2% of salary + 10% of a player's endorsement revenue. I don't know what the fee is to be a member of the AFL PA but this is on top of a manager's fees.

Players are far better off retaining an advocate at contract time and on an as-needs basis if required. Fee for service stuff. The same goes for every other employee - you are actually better off having a personal advocate in the majority of cases than being represented by a union, unless collective muscle needs to be mobilised. When has there ever been an AFL or SANFL players strike, picket line or work to rule campaign?

I would suggest any player needing some help consult a specialist on an as-needs basis. Get a Registered Agent of the state IR Commission (see http://www.industrialcourt.sa.gov.au) to negotiate any specific terms and conditions. Get a contract lawyer to review the contract if it has variations from the standard contract made to it. And before anyone harks up about $$$ here, there are places that do pro bono work (contact the law society) and there are also community legal centres who offer free legal services to those that meet the criteria.

Finally, what is a SANFL players union going to negotiate - a "collective bargaining agrrement" to divide up the ABC broadcast rights money? Give me strength!

Squawk wrote: That would require 100% of players to pay 5% membership fees each week.

Not true. If South and North players were to pay 1% of their real, rather than declared, income this union could get off the ground quick smart.

(for the obtuse)

topsywaldron wrote:

Squawk wrote: That would require 100% of players to pay 5% membership fees each week.

Not true. If South and North players were to pay 1% of their real, rather than declared, income this union could get off the ground quick smart.

(for the obtuse)

Norwood players can join for free to save them having to pay in 1 and 2 cent pieces from the club piggy bank!

BPBRB wrote:

topsywaldron wrote:

Squawk wrote: That would require 100% of players to pay 5% membership fees each week.

Not true. If South and North players were to pay 1% of their real, rather than declared, income this union could get off the ground quick smart.

(for the obtuse)

Norwood players can join for free to save them having to pay in 1 and 2 cent pieces from the club piggy bank!

Father time is tapping us on the shoulder and he has his chequebook with him - the Legs recovery is imminent.

I'm up for a union.

And before anyone harks up about $$$ here, there are places that do pro bono work (contact the law society) and there are also community legal centres who offer free legal services to those that meet the criteria.

Hi Squawk

True, but have you ever actually tried to use any of the free services from a community legal centre? Also why would an avarage sanfl leauge player meet the criteria (a full time job + football $'s would exclude the vast majority). I can just see 360 footballers (9 clubs * 40 players) contacting the law society and asking for pro bono assistance with contract negotiations. What do you think the respose would be?

Peterxtc wrote:

And before anyone harks up about $$$ here, there are places that do pro bono work (contact the law society) and there are also community legal centres who offer free legal services to those that meet the criteria.

Hi Squawk

True, but (1) have you ever actually tried to use any of the free services from a community legal centre? (2) Also why would an avarage sanfl leauge player meet the criteria (a full time job + football $'s would exclude the vast majority). (3) I can just see 360 footballers (9 clubs * 40 players) contacting the law society and asking for pro bono assistance with contract negotiations. What do you think the respose would be?

1. No but Mrs Squawk has worked for one and did a wide variety of work there. Admittedly, none of it was sports law but certainly some work was in contract law.
2. Dont recall the criteria specifically but dont forget a lot of players would only be making small football salaries and training commitments dont usually allow them to work big $ jobs. They may also have dependents to support.
3. This is an unlikely scenario. Not every player's contract expires on the same date. Also, not every player wants/needs help. Finally, the law society offers referral services to pro bono "offerors", it doesnt do the work in house.

My main point is that a players union would not be financially sustainable. Secondly, not everyone needs these type of services. Thirdly, a union provides collective muscle in the main - if required - and I dont see that ever being harnessed.