Does Football Pay? A Living Wage in the Game

(Image: The Telegraph)

Working for your local football club might just be a dream job for many people. Having first-hand experience and knowledge of how it runs at an operational level gives a feeling of real involvement in its development and success. A priceless opportunity, you might say?

Indeed, a large percentage of clubs across England remain existent because of the efforts of volunteer workers. Only those who work for the club on a full-time basis are generally given any sort of salary, such as directors and chairmen. Even then, these are usually voluntary positions until you reach the higher levels of the non-league.

Into the professional game, there is a requirement for greater numbers of staff for match days and other events. With bigger crowds comes more stewards, refreshment kiosk staff, security and cleaners etc. These are all positions that demand payment of some kind, as the people that fill them will do so for a living.

If the game is so reliant upon its staff that make clubs run smoothly, you would assume that they are well looked after. But can those people afford to feed, clothe and house themselves? And with so much money in the sport – particularly at the higher levels – should pay even be a concern for fringe staff whatsoever?

Fair Pay for Fair Work

You may have heard recent reports revolving around the working arrangements of people making up the lower levels of football clubs being referred to as “zero hour” contracts.

This type of agreement means that clubs, as well as other businesses, can employ staff on the understanding that they will not be guaranteed a set amount of hours. This is something used by football clubs in particular because of its ‘seasonal’ nature, i.e. one or two fixtures per week, with a long break in the summer time (save for a couple of friendly matches).

In the case of higher-level stewards, for example, gone are the days when clubs could simply pluck people off of the street to sit in front of the crowd in a high-vis. Each and every steward and crowd control staff member is professionally trained to not only deal with problems, but to recognise potential problems early.

This is something that came in after the tragedy at Hillsborough and the implementation of the Football Licensing Authority’s Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds – otherwise known as ‘The Green Guide’. Premier League clubs will have approximately one steward for every 300 spectators, meaning that a ground like Arsenal’s Emirates Stadium will require anything up to 250 stewards for every match. They will be responsible for anything from safety checks of barriers and gates, to administering emergency first aid.

Stewards pay has been something of a closely guarded secret at the top level, but the average figure for the top 10 clubs equates to around £8.00 an hour. This has now come in for analysis and scrutiny, with the ‘living wage’ being more frequently mentioned. The ‘Green Guide’ states that the responsibility held by employees such as stewards should have equal pay for equal work – purely to reflect that responsibility.

Demand for a ‘living wage’

In December last year, Chelsea became the first Premier League club to adopt the ‘living wage’ for its staff of £9.15 per hour. That is the figure for clubs inside London, with the rate for those outside of the capital being £7.85 set by the Living Wage Foundation.

The term does exactly what it says; it is the number considered to be the basic minimum amount required to cover living expenses. Chelsea’s chairman Bruce Buck stated that the move was an indicator of the club’s “commitment to ensuring that all our employees receive a fair rate of pay for their hard work and dedication”.

For a club of its size, turning over £320m in 2013/14, commentators would likely feel that this move is the least it could do. Its most recent annual player wage bill was just over £190m. The club has also signed a new shirt deal for next season with Yokahama Rubber for £200m over five years.

So they’ll surely have some spare change laying around for the bar staff and the cleaners?

The PR Machine - Are Players Ill-Advised?

Image: BBC Sport

The first instance that I can remember where a player had held a club to ransom was Patrick Vieira. Talk of a £100,000-a-week contract at that time was almost unheard of, yet Arsenal were more than happy to meet that demand. And it wasn’t the first time that Vieira had given his club a nervous wait for a signature on a contract.

This was largely down to what has been labeled “player power”, or perhaps more accurately, “agent power”. The person or people behind young, talented players have had an increased role to play over the last decade or more, putting often unrealistic demands on a club in order to keep their prized assets.

The most recent case in the news has been that of Raheem Sterling, who very publicly announced that he had turned down a £100,000-a-week contract with Liverpool – a pay rise of £65,000 on his current deal which runs for another season or two.

Sterling’s interview with the BBC was considered a “PR disaster” by various pundits, thinking it completely unnecessary to speak about how and why the 20-year old hasn’t put pen to paper.

But was it the player’s choice to do so, or the advisors and agents behind the scenes? After all, they have a vested interest in anything the player takes home – often a very significant percentage of his earnings.

Rule Changes

With the increasing marketability of successful young stars, opportunities outside of their player wages can be potentially limitless. Cristiano Ronaldo’s endorsement deal with Nike is reportedly worth £14.1million per year. That’s on top of his £13.7million annual wages, as well as all of the other promotional work that he does.

Suffice to say, earning power is astronomical when your playing stock is high. And your agents, representatives and advisors stand to earn very comfortable livings on the back of your successes.

The word “exploit” can have both good and bad meanings; you might want to make the most of your own good situation, or take advantage of someone else’s bad one. So it is the new way in which agents are governed which is causing concern amongst those trying to safeguard the moral handling of young players’ affairs.

No longer will Fifa be the overarching body responsible for agent rules. Such ‘deregulation’ means that agents will have to adhere to the rules from their own country. It also means that anybody with “an impeccable reputation” can simply pay £500 to the FA and become an intermediary, or in other words, a player or club representative.

What’s the danger?

And why is this a potentially bad thing? It comes back to that word “exploit”. One of the major concerns is that young footballers on the brink of potential global stardom and success will be lured towards a representative that might be attractive for all the wrong reasons. Though not necessarily in all cases, what might be lacking in expertise could be replaced with glitz and glamour.

Speaking to the BBC, David Seligman, a solicitor and agent, said, "A player could end up signing with someone who isn't insured and will not be qualified for several years. Those sorts of guys are going to be going out and representing players without having the necessary skill or qualification to do so. It could cause problems down the line."

Bad advice can be dangerous to a young player, particularly in a cash rich business like the Premier League. The number of players in the English game’s “lost generation” stretches too far to be counted. It might be reasonable to argue that this has been due to greed and exploitation from agents and advisors.

A short, lucrative career of a 19-year old starlet is a better bet for agents than a long and languid one.

Here Come the Girls

(Image: BBC Sport)

It is no secret that association football is and has long been dominated by men. Players, officials, directors and even medical staff have all traditionally been from the male population. But all of that is changing, because although there have been ladies teams at most professional clubs for many years, it wasn’t until fairly recently that females have been able to play full-time.

For generations, gender equality has been fought for in the work place, in the family unit and also in sport. Of course, countless women have made history in athletics and other Olympic sports, but football has always seemed to be that little bit further behind.

On the international stage, the USA has had a very successful 25 years. They won the first women’s World Cup in 1991, were victorious again in 1999, and have finished no lower than third in the other four tournaments. They have amassed four gold medals out of a possible five in Olympic tournaments and finished with a silver in the other.

That’s how to dominate a sport. But where do the ladies from England rank in the international game? To what standard is the sport played and what does the future hold for females in football?

English Roses

As far as the sport goes in England, the Women’s Super League, or WSL, was launched in March 2011. The League is made up of two divisions; one has eight teams, two has ten.

All of the usual suspects are in the top division, a handful being Arsenal, Manchester City, Liverpool and Chelsea. Arsenal have been particularly successful, collecting 14 league titles (12 Women’s Premier League and 2 WSL wins), 13 FA Cups, 3 WSL Cups and a UEFA Champions League win. This has all been achieved, quite impressively, within the last 25 years.

But now some of the others are catching up. Since the inception of the WSL, players have been given the opportunity to turn professional, with the initial format allowing for up to four players per team to be full-time players on up to £20,000 a year.

You read that correctly - £20,000 per YEAR. It would take Wayne Rooney just over 11 hours to earn what a top player in the WSL would earn in a whole year.

Even compared to their North American peers, this money seems paltry. Teams in the USA’s Women’s United Soccer Association league have annual wage budgets of around $2-3million (£1.4-2million), against to the WSL’s £200,000-300,000 figure.

What the WSL does offer, however, is a stepping-stone into earning as a full time player, something that was not available in any meaningful way beforehand. It also deters our best players from flying across the Atlantic to play instead, which will be vitally important if we are to compete as a national side.

The Lionesses

The national team’s fortunes have been mixed - much like their male counterparts - but have never been lacking in individual ability. All-time leading scorer Kelly Smith managed 46 goals in 117 caps over ten years for England and has enjoyed extended successes with her club sides. She helped the ‘Lionesses’ reach the quarterfinals of the 2007 and 2011 World Cups, as well as finishing runners-up at the 2009 European Championships.

Amongst the current crop there is Chelsea’s Eniola Aluko, who herself has scored 26 goals in 83 England appearances. She is a full-time professional like many others in the WSL, but she juggles that with her other profession as a solicitor. Not quite your average 28-year-old footballer.

But is there a future for more players to come through like Aluko and Smith? Is there a long-term place for women in the game and how can participation be preserved? The priorities have been creating the WSL, increasing the interest of young girls in playing more football and to enable clubs to create better infrastructures with a view to turning professional.

Like the men’s game, money is a big thing in women’s football. The more there is, the better chance it has of growing. Popularity and financing have increased, so hopefully the number of women involved will too.