COMPENSATION AND THE EU
The current controversy regarding whether or not an eircom league club is entitled to compensation payment for a young player who has completed his employment contract with the club, highlights several issues regarding the rights of young footballers in the European Union.
The Treaty of Amsterdam states that an EU citizen cannot be discriminated against on the ground of sex, nationality, racial or ethnic origin, religion, disability, age or sexual orientation (Article 13, Title II).
Let us compare a young Irish footballer with a young Irish motor mechanic. The argument put forward by the clubs is one of entitlement of compensation for training and education of the young player (Under 23). How many Irish clubs actually educate their players?
The current rule in the eircom League allows a club to seek compensation if the player is under 23 years on the 1st of January in the year that his contract finishes and has been employed with his club for two consecutive seasons. Also the club must have offered the player a new contract that was not less favourable than his last contract.
A young motor mechanic begins his apprenticeship at the age of seventeen and qualifies four years later at 21 years of age. The footballer and the mechanic pay the same taxes and on completion of their employment contracts they are offered new jobs with new employers. The offers will double their wages. This is when it all changes.
The mechanic can take up his new employment immediately with his new employer. While the young footballers’ new employer must pay his old employer a fee which in the eircom League, is calculated as follows, a club is entitled to four times the annual salary paid to the player in his last year of employment and if they dont agree the fee, the player cannot play.
For example, player A earns €80 per week for 33 weeks (a season). He is playing in the under 21 team at a Premier League club and occasionally gets a place on first team bench. At the end of his second season the club offers him a new contract on the same money (€80). The club are now entitled to €10560 if the player wishes to go to his new club. The new club are playing in the eircom League first division and feel that he player could play in their first team, which would mean the player has the opportunity to improve his pay and conditions and his skills by signing for his new club.
However the new club cannot afford to pay the “compensation fee for training and education”, leaving the player with no option but to stay where he is. Call it unfair, discrimination or whatever; the only certainty is that it’s illegal.
This is obviously a double edged sword. It's not exactly alright for an EPL side to entice our youth across the channel without an offer of conpensation but it's alright for the $h€liban to take Cawley without any offer or compensation. Should Cawley succeed in the High court will Derry request a rebate?
Originally Posted by Xlex
One that I can think of, UCD.
Doubt it. The Club accepted that Galway were due compensation of some kind. 10% of the compensation also went to Ballinrobe Town, who Murphy was at before Galway.
I think it's only right that clubs pay if they take a young player from another club. It gives clubs with a youth structure an incentive to keep them going.
Wouldn't like it if an English club decided to raid our youth teams and we got nothing for it.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks