NRL Salary Cap/CBA -2023 - 2027

[Maximus]

Who gets paid more?

Luai or Bailey Hayward.

What players bring personal sponsors to the game?

Those who are good get individual TPA's, The clubs/NRL as a whole bring in the sponsorship

Your original post suggested that it doesn't matter who is playing, the NRL is what brings in the money, not the player, so therefore the player shouldn't be entitled to the additional revenue. It is crazy for you and @Wb1234 to suggest that some nuffie Bulldogs NSW cup player would bring the same revenue as a premiership winning half. It is crazy to suggest that if every NRL player went on strike, that the league would be worth the same with teams full of NSW and QLD cup players.

The NRL isn't the competition it is without the elite players.

 

[wazdog]

Had to laugh at Crawley on 360 yesterday having a go at Newton meeting with the Unions boss.
"It's not even a union...it's an association" he said.

No Crawley, it is a union you f**king idiot.

I'm curious to know is it normal for employers to pay union fees on behalf of their employees?

 

[Wb1234]

R

 

[Maximus]

I'm curious to know is it normal for employers to pay union fees on behalf of their employees?

Yes, it is normal for businesses to pay union fees on behalf of their employees as part of payroll.

 

[wazdog]

So as part of players regular salary payment there is a deduction that comes out for RLPA dues that the clubs then pays the RLPA?

What if a player doesn't want to be part of the RLPA, do they have the option to ask for the money instead?

 

[Chimp]

So as part of players regular salary payment there is a deduction that comes out for RLPA dues that the clubs then pays the RLPA?

What if a player doesn't want to be part of the RLPA, do they have the option to ask for the money instead?

That’s the thing, the RLPA had terrible numbers when it was a paid membership, what happens now, is the NRL funds the RLPA directly, so all players are covered by the RLPA, rather than it being a traditional membership Union. Effectively, the couple of million it that is used to fund the RLPA is taken from the overall amount of money set aside for the players. The NRL did this to help try and create a strong players voice/Union, yet the RLPA act like the NRL are going to run off and sell their medical
records for millions to China…. Ridiculous as always.
The NRL should scrap the current RLPA funding model, put that couple of million back onto the salary cap and let it go back to being a paid membership, see how many players value the RLPA enough to not pocket the extra cash instead of paying a membership.

 

[Chimp]

So as part of players regular salary payment there is a deduction that comes out for RLPA dues that the clubs then pays the RLPA?

What if a player doesn't want to be part of the RLPA, do they have the option to ask for the money instead?

Nope - the funding model mean all players are members, like it or not.

 

[Perth Red]

I'm curious to know is it normal for employers to pay union fees on behalf of their employees?

Professional sport isn’t a ‘normal business’, never has been, never will be. Eg What other business can sell one of its contracted employees to another company?

 

[Delboy]

Professional sport isn’t a ‘normal business’, never has been, never will be. Eg What other business can sell one of its contracted employees to another company?

Your thinking of European soccer acting in the transfer portal, in our professional sport it’s just the player having control basically as he can run the contract down and hit the open market. If the club makes a move, they are still responsible for the cash he would have been paid. Completely different to soccer and to a lesser extent American football ,baseball,and basketball .

 

[Vee]

Yes, it is normal for businesses to pay union fees on behalf of their employees as part of payroll.

Apparently, I work for the wrong mob.

Mind you, I've never heard of an employer paying union fees.

 

[Wb1234]

TikTok - Make Your Day

vt.tiktok.com

Bolts hasn’t had a spray that justified since he got ribot on the footy show

 

[Iamback]

Your original post suggested that it doesn't matter who is playing, the NRL is what brings in the money, not the player, so therefore the player shouldn't be entitled to the additional revenue. It is crazy for you and @Wb1234 to suggest that some nuffie Bulldogs NSW cup player would bring the same revenue as a premiership winning half. It is crazy to suggest that if every NRL player went on strike, that the league would be worth the same with teams full of NSW and QLD cup players.

The NRL isn't the competition it is without the elite players.

When Cam Smith retired, Did the Storm lose any sponsors?

What about at Souffs with Burgess and GI?

They are trying to copy the NBA model, It works over there because they have individual jersey numbers, shoes etc. it allows them to track an
Individual players worth to teams and the league.

Here you have sponsors of the Penrith number 6 jersey not the player wearing that jersey.

So until you have that 6 jersey assigned to a player for the whole season. Any revenue it brings in is the property of the club/NRL

The player if they are good. Will get media gigs, shares in a pub ( In Tino's ). And that rightfully is the players.

 

[Iamback]

Professional sport isn’t a ‘normal business’, never has been, never will be. Eg What other business can sell one of its contracted employees to another company?

Yet they bang on about comparing their conditions to other work places.

Can't have it both ways

 

[Wb1234]

The
Workers
United

will
Never
Be
Defeated

 

[Captain Apollo]

Apparently, I work for the wrong mob.

Mind you, I've never heard of an employer paying union fees.

In many industries Unions have agreements with employers that member's can request his/her fees be deducted from their pay by the employer who will then forward that money to the Union via direct debit. Some Unions moved away from this when the last Liberal Government in Victoria (iirc) unilaterally terminated these arrangements for its own workers, resulting in the unions have no income. They then had to work hard to get members to sign up to direct debit arrangements with the union directly.

The reason NRL players may not care about being in the RLPA is, based on how its been explained publicly, the money comes direct via the NRL without any money being deducted from each player's contract payments. As such it is an unusual situation which, if the NRL really wanted to, could stop doing if they wanted to really to hurt the RLPA in the short term.

 

[Maximus]

When Cam Smith retired, Did the Storm lose any sponsors?

What about at Souffs with Burgess and GI?

They are trying to copy the NBA model, It works over there because they have individual jersey numbers, shoes etc. it allows them to track an
Individual players worth to teams and the league.

Here you have sponsors of the Penrith number 6 jersey not the player wearing that jersey.

So until you have that 6 jersey assigned to a player for the whole season. Any revenue it brings in is the property of the club/NRL

The player if they are good. Will get media gigs, shares in a pub ( In Tino's ). And that rightfully is the players.

So what you are saying is that every single NRL player could walk out now, the jerseys get filled with park footballers, and sponsors, media, tv etc would be happy to pay the exact same amount of money? You are saying that the elite players don't impact the value that businesses are willing to pay the NRL?

 

[Maximus]

In many industries Unions have agreements with employers that member's can request his/her fees be deducted from their pay by the employer who will then forward that money to the Union via direct debit. Some Unions moved away from this when the last Liberal Government in Victoria (iirc) unilaterally terminated these arrangements for its own workers, resulting in the unions have no income. They then had to work hard to get members to sign up to direct debit arrangements with the union directly.

The reason NRL players may not care about being in the RLPA is, based on how its been explained publicly, the money comes direct via the NRL without any money being deducted from each player's contract payments. As such it is an unusual situation which, if the NRL really wanted to, could stop doing if they wanted to really to hurt the RLPA in the short term.

The players agreed to fund it with a portion of the salary cap. The NRL have no power to withhold it, other than deciding not to pay their bills, in which case the lawsuit would be much more costly than any benefit they got.

The only portion of the funding the NRL is responsible for is their payment for players image rights, and if they choose to withhold that, good luck to them when they try to advertise the NRL without any NRL players.

 

[Iamback]

So what you are saying is that every single NRL player could walk out now, the jerseys get filled with park footballers, and sponsors, media, tv etc would be happy to pay the exact same amount of money? You are saying that the elite players don't impact the value that businesses are willing to pay the NRL?

If fans are prepared to watch a bunch a park footballers why would sponsors care?

Sponsors pay for the exposure.

Have Souffs fans stopped watching because no Latrell?

 

[Wb1234]

I can’t find the tweet but the rlpa is claiming the nrl don’t pay the union

something along the lines of it’s comes out of the players share of revenue

 

[Vee]

In many industries Unions have agreements with employers that member's can request his/her fees be deducted from their pay by the employer who will then forward that money to the Union via direct debit. Some Unions moved away from this when the last Liberal Government in Victoria (iirc) unilaterally terminated these arrangements for its own workers, resulting in the unions have no income. They then had to work hard to get members to sign up to direct debit arrangements with the union directly.

That's not the employer paying union fees.