The NRL has relinquished its push for a strict post-season trade window, proposing players be able to sign with rival clubs for the following year after June 30, in a bid to smooth fractious pay talks.
The league’s desire for a transfer window has been one of several factors in the dispute between the NRL and its players, with a collective bargaining agreement two-and-a-half months overdue.
Tensions between the parties reached boiling point this week, with players boycotting all promotional activities and refusing to rule out strike action. The All-Stars match next month could be under threat.
The Rugby League Players Association board is yet to formally respond to the terms of the NRL’s latest offer sent to the union late last week.
It’s expected the board will reject the proposal, with players having pushed on with the promotional boycott after the terms were sent.
AAP has been told one of the changes in the NRL’s offered terms is to the proposed transfer system.
Under current rules in the old CBA, off-contract players are able to sign with rival clubs for 2025 from as early as November 1, 2023.
ARL Commission chair Peter V’landys. (Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
An NRL proposal last year had pushed that date out until after the 2024 grand final, giving players 11 less months to negotiate.
That was met with firm resistance from the players, who claimed careers were being placed at risk if an off-contract player was injured.
The NRL’s new proposal would remove some of that risk while still tightening the system, with players able to sign deals for 2025 from July 2024.
The league would also introduce a mid-season transfer window between round 10 and the end of State of Origin as previously mooted.
The NRL remains adamant it has have offered a good deal to the players, with a total player payment pool of $1.347 billion over five years, an increase of 35 per cent on the last five-year CBA.
That figure includes an $11.45 million salary cap for top-30 squad members at each club, up from $9.6 million, as well as a combined $650,000 for development players on a club’s list.
CLICK HERE for a seven-day free trial for your favourite sport on KAYO
The women’s salary cap has also risen to $884,000 from $350,000 with more games to be played.
The announcement of the salary caps last December angered the union, as they questioned how anything could be finalised without other components of the agreement settled.
The union and NRL also differ on whether the total payment pool has increased in line with the game’s revenue, with an extra men’s team and inclusion of eight women’s sides muddying the water.
AAP can also reveal NRL terms received by the players’ union last week include more than $200 million in funding for welfare, retired players’ injury fund and other matters over the life of the CBA.
Wade Graham. (AAP Image/Craig Golding)
How such money is administrated is set to remain a point of contention.
The RLPA is adamant it wants autonomy on it, while the NRL would rather program management is shared.
Agreement rights on integrity matters are among other priorities for the RLPA which are unlikely to be granted by the NRL.
RLPA director and Cronulla captain Wade Graham claimed on SEN radio on Wednesday that the NRL offer had “gone backwards” on previous CBAs.
“It goes to show how determined the players are that they are willing to take this stand,” Graham said.
“We all feel like the approach we have taken so far hasn’t really got us too far. We haven’t progressed. Talks have stalled. The proposal has gone backwards.
“The players are united in this.”
Gus O
Guest
Who isn’t fed up with corporate administrators acting as though they own the game? Haven’t we all seen this play out over and over in different codes? Isn’t this a straight forward power play by NRL head office to claim unilateral decision making authority and to disempower the players association? To me it looks like unnecessarily divisive behaviour and another self inflicted black eye. We should be excited about the coming season instead of this unnecessary administrative conflict. When will head office get charged for bringing the game into disrepute?
Dave
Guest
I said nothing of the sort to indicate that's what I thought :laughing:
Andrew01
Roar Rookie
Noel Cleal calls the current players greedy. He needs to sub out the word "greedy" and replace it with "better informed" or simply "smarter".
Andrew01
Roar Rookie
Why the aversion to NRL involvement? Because the NRL/ARLC have shown themselves to be untrustworthy and to not have the best interest of players at heart. You want to talk about suitability to make decisions, PVL chops and changes rules - he has no playing, officiating or coaching experience. That you thought a couple of players wanted to literally coordinate the retirement fund program and that they wouldn't seek to engage experts of their choosing, probably speaks more to your education level than theirs.
Red Rob
Roar Rookie
Take it as read that at least half of all NRL players are not in favour of Newton or his bully boy tactics but are too scared to publicly speak out against him and the like. Ahhhh, the “silent majority” who just happen to think what you think they think. Right.
Red Rob
Roar Rookie
Calm down, they are not asking for and no-one is giving them the keys to the safe.
Dumbo
Roar Rookie
“The RLPA is adamant it wants autonomy on it, while the NRL would rather program management is shared” Where are the funds coming from ? Given they funds come from the NRL, the NRL has a right to ensure it can veto the appointment of the investment managers of the trust fund. What would happen if the RLPA hired a fund manager and gave that manager the instructions to "invest aggressively", and the fund manager put a lot into high risk investments (like bitcoin or FTX etc), and it all went pear-shaped ? RLPA would demand the NRL re-capitalise the fund - they would have to unless they were prepared to levy money from the players to top it back up. So if the NRL is to be regarded as the "bank of last resort", then the NRL has a right to at least 50% (I reckon 100%) of the supervision of the trust fund.
Sports Nut
Roar Rookie
Noel Cleal's recent comments weren't too far off the mark (about the top players wanting more money and he considers it greed)....he was right in part. Crusher is also right in saying more money needs to go into Development particularly in Country & Provincial areas. Clint Newton is crying crocodile tears in bagging Crusher. He should have had this deal done, but he has tried to cut the best negotiators in the game; the Agents; out at every turn. He has to understand that the players don't run the game, the ARLC does. Having said that, there is plenty of common ground to work off. In relation to ALL the players in the game; from U7's to NRL (including women) the RLPA only represents a small percentage. He & the RLPA Board need to remember where they came from and what sort of legacy they wish to leave behind. I desperately hope that the RLPA does not end up like RUPA & the leading players in Rugby, who have virtually killed Professional Rugby in this Country.
Dave
Guest
Because you're giving a couple of humans who have zero real world experience in finance & administration and in some instances even questionable levels of basic education the ability to severely impact an organisation that deals with millions of dollars. In what other business setting would that occur? "It would have professional funds management, oversight, reporting and auditing. The RLPA could act on independent advice and manage where the funds are invested and grow value for its members" - If this were the case, why the aversion to NRL involvement? Doesn't make sense
Dave
Guest
What sort of a comeback is that :laughing: I'm not demanding to be in the negotiation room and throwing my weight around when im clearly not qualified to do so Couple of years ago i actually did, yea
A Little Birdy
Guest
If the players think the majority of fans are going to back them over any strike action, they are in for a rude shock. This is a game of chicken and PVL won't be blinking first. Does anyone seriously think that the RLPA would have the guts to instruct it's members to boycott the All Stars game. As someone said after hearing Clint Newton on SEN this morning, he sounds more and more like a 70's union thug these days than a leader of a "professional" sporting organisation. Take it as read that at least half of all NRL players are not in favour of Newton or his bully boy tactics but are too scared to publicly speak out against him and the like. The next vote on the RLPA leadership will be very interesting if it is done as a secret ballot.
Don
Roar Rookie
Why are Welch's & Graham's credentials important to the initiation and administration of a benefits fund? I imagine it would be a trust like the NFL FPBT (former player benefits trust) or an alike mechanism for Australian financial requirements, and would be managed in line with relevant legislation and compliance for a NFP fund. It's not like there would be a pot of money that Welch, Graham or another director or executive can access and make a decision themselves to give some coin to someone. It would have professional funds management, oversight, reporting and auditing. The RLPA could act on independent advice and manage where the funds are invested and grow value for its members.
andrew
Roar Rookie
What are your credentials and do you work for the NRL?
Dave
Guest
"The RLPA is adamant it wants autonomy on it, while the NRL would rather program management is shared" Imagine giving the RLPA full autonomy over millions of dollars :laughing: They're led by Welch who has a basic business degree and zero life experience & Graham who probably barely finished high school given he debuted when he was 17. How are these guys given such a big voice and want so much say. Any other profession they'd be laughed out of the negotiation room.