Women soccer players claim males earned millions more than them

Members of the U.S. women's national soccer team said they could have earned millions in compensation if they were paid the same as their male counterparts in a filing seeking class certification for their equal pay suit against the U.S. Soccer Federation.

The federation, represented by Chicago employment attorney Ellen E. McLaughlin of Seyfarth Shaw LLP, had argued against class certification in late September, saying the women's team's motion should be denied because the proposed class representatives Alex Morgan, Megan Rapinoe, Carli Lloyd and Becky Sauerbrunn were paid more than even the highest-earning men's team members and therefore suffered no injury.

"Standing is a jurisdictional requirement and requires the plaintiff ... to prove that the proposed class representatives suffered an injury that is 'concrete' and 'de facto,' meaning that it must actually exist," McLaughlin wrote.

The women's team fired back Monday, calling the argument citing the four class representatives, "utterly frivolous," and based on an "illogical proposition."

The women's team is represented by New York partner Jeffrey L. Kessler of Winston & Strawn LLP. He argued the four named female players were only able to earn such compensation by playing in many more games and being far more successful.

Citing Ebbert v. Nassau Cnty, Kessler wrote that "'This type of argument -- based on a comparison of 'total remuneration' where there are discriminatory rates of pay -- has been squarely rejected '[a]s a matter of common sense' because it would lead to an 'absurd result.'"

"As explained by the court in Ebbert: [T]otal remuneration cannot be the proper point of comparison [because i]f it were, an employer who pays a woman $10 per hour and a man $20 per hour would not violate the EPA ... as long as the woman negated the obvious disparity by working twice as many hours," Kessler wrote.

The correct injury analysis, he argued, is whether the women's team would have earned more compensation under the same rate policy as the men's team.

According to Monday's brief, each of the four named plaintiffs would have earned at least $2.5 million more over the same period had they been compensated under the men's policy.

After winning their third international championship, all 28 players on the women's team filed a collective action and class action against the federation in March, claiming gender discrimination and violations of their civil rights. Alex Morgan et al v. United States Soccer Federation, Inc. 19-cv-01717 (C.D. Cal. filed March, 8, 2019).

In July, federation president Carlos Cordeiro wrote in an open letter to colleagues and U.S. soccer supporters saying he and the federation believe all women deserve fair and equal pay but that the two teams operate under separate collective bargaining agreements.

"In the case of our men's and women's national teams, they have different pay structures, not because of gender, but because each team chose to negotiate a different compensation package with U.S. Soccer," he said.

Responding in a phone interview Tuesday, Kessler said:

"They did not--in their bargaining agreement-- say, 'could you please pay us less.' Women asked for equal pay and were refused, that is discrimination."

U.S. Magistrate Judge Alicia G. Rosenberg in Los Angeles ordered the federation to file an opposition on or before Oct. 22. The trial date has been set for May 5, 2020.

Attorneys for the federation were unavailable for comment Tuesday.