The Rugby League Players Association is trying to strike a pay deal with the NRL that is similar to the one they knocked back a month ago.
The two parties are trying to negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement for the past three months, yet no agreement has been reached.
The most lucrative deal offered would have left the playing group in a financial position $10 million better off than the offer now on the table.
However, the RLPA requested more time and information to make a decision. Given some other entitlements – such as the injury hardship and retirement funds – would be affected, they were pushing for a drop of just 2.5 per cent.
The new deal is believed to involve a salary cap decrease of 10 per cent, which leaves the playing group $10 million worse off.
The negotiations come at a time when the NRL announced the need to slash $50 million in costs to stay financially stable in the COVID crisis.
“The playing group would be left worse off…”? You should say the top few players would be worse off. I have advocated a drop in the % that the Clubs need to spend of their salary cap (say 80% not the current 95%) with a 5% drop in the Club grants ($13M) That is more productive than a drop in the cap or a % cut in players salaries. That equates to$10.4M in NRL savings & allows the clubs around $1.425M each to better manage their current rosters. The issue is that the highest paid players are on the RLPA Board & they are only interested in keeping their salaries at the highest level. The great majority of players don’t get a say and that is the injustice as the RLPA only represent the top few highest paid players.