#sara björk gunnarsdóttir

[pernillemagda]

Pernille's story 18.08.2023

[martixjwomen]

I know Christmas is over, but them 🥺🤍🖤

They are my family ❤️

[femftbllvr]

[fancybelieverdinosaur]

Magda's latest column

[kyokuma]

2024-2-4 vs Juventus

[anechoastain]

He's the beautifulest

Fragilest still strong

Dark and divine

And the littleness of his movements

Hides himself

Invents a charm

That makes him invisible

Hides in the air

Can I hide there too

Hide in the air of him

Seek solace

Sanctuary

[indizombie]

As the first footballer to successfully sue a club for pregnancy discrimination, Gunnarsdóttir has set a precedent for the professional game all over the world. In women's football, pregnancy and family planning have been two of the biggest influences in players' decisions to retire early: not because they are physically incapable of returning to the sport, but because the clubs and leagues around them have, historically, offered little to no support in doing so. But this is the first time that FIFA, a global governing body, has handed down such a ruling. It's significant because it is a standard that will affect clubs within all 211 of its member associations and provide professional athletes who wish to fall pregnant — particularly women — with the reassurance that they have an added global layer of legal protection that did not exist a few years ago. As Gunnarsdóttir's case shows, FIFA's regulations even over-rule domestic civil laws, which Lyon had cited as the reason for their decreased payments to her, but which FIFA's tribunal ultimately rejected.

Samantha Lewis, ‘A pregnant footballer sued her club for discrimination at FIFA — and won. Here's why it matters’, ABC

[female-malice]

Bro what the fuck are you talking about

as long as women have to bear children and feed them for years using their own bodies womens careers will always get damaged. literally no amount of housework ur husband does will ever change that

[glimmerofawesome]

[alexbkrieger13]

[pernillemagda]

Ella finding "gems"😂

[redwineconversation]

Sara Bjork Gunnarsdottir vs. Olympique Lyonnais Legal Case Analysis

I'd ask certain blogs to stay in their lane next time but why do that when they can just trash a team they know nothing about for a case they don't understand?

So let's do a recap of the case: Olympique Lyonnais ("Lyon") signs Sara Bjork Gunnarsdottir ("SBG") in August 2020. This is in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, which is a factor later on. SBG learns she is pregnant early March 2021, tells the team in April 2021, goes back to Iceland, gives birth there, and returns to Lyon January 2022, plays her first game back with Lyon in March 2022. Upon her return she is faced with significantly reduced playing time. She leaves at the end of her contract (June 2022) for Juventus.

In the meantime, we have the following timeline: after her return to Iceland, Lyon starts withholding her paychecks before eventually paying her a decreased salary. In the interim, head coach Jean-Luc Vasseur is replaced by Sonia Bompastor in April 2021. Lyon signed midfielders Catarina Macario and Damaris in January 2021, Danielle van de Donk in June 2021, and Lindsey Horan in January 2022. This is also relevant later on.

SBG goes to FIFA/FIFPRO and argues that Lyon deliberately withheld her wages allegedly out of spite for becoming pregnant. There were also allegations of being mistreated by the staff. She argues that Lyon failed to abide by FIFA regulations. Lyon argues that they are bound by French law, not FIFA, since Lyon is a French business entity based in France.

SBG wins her case, Lyon pays her the remaining amount of her salary, and this is settled in May 2022. The ruling however becomes public in January 2023 and SBG writes a scathing article laying out Lyon's shortcomings in full.

Now it's easy to look at SBG's essay and be appalled. Lyon did withhold wages! From a pregnant woman at that! She returned and was faced with reduced playing time! The board was hostile! Really, Lyon comes across as monsters in that essay. I'm not going to sit here and pretend I wasn't appalled.

But I was also surprised, because her accusations didn't sound like Lyon at all. This is the most successful women's club in the world. Aulas is very explicit in his support for women's football. And yet Lyon did all that? Just seemed really odd, and concerning.

So I dug a little deeper and it turns out that Lyon basically lost on a technicality. Even the ruling noted that Lyon wasn't actually wrong, and if it wasn't for the FIFA mandate which came into affect January 2021, Lyon would have won their case instead.

Now keep in mind what I said earlier: Lyon's argument was that they were a French entity whose business operations were based in France and therefore were bound by French law. That meant that SBG's paycheck was determined, in their eyes, by French employment laws.

And let's go back over the timeline: SBG learns she is pregnant in March 2021 but only tells the board and the team in April 2021 (the medical staff were made aware in March 2021 but kept it confidential). Claiming legitimate fears of COVID, SBG returns to Iceland in April 2021 but doesn't give birth until November 2021.

Lyon argued that the period of April 2021 to November 2021 was not maternity leave but simply leave, which, under French law, meant that they did not have to pay. It was only her actual maternity leave that they would have to cover in full (November 2021 - January 2022). Lyon also argued that she hadn't been at the club for 12 months, meaning that she wasn't protected by "statute" protecting longterm players.

Where Lyon lost the case was on the technicality of employment. Lyon argued that SBG since (1) never asked for a form of alternative employment (eg communications) immediately after the pregnancy was confirmed [she only did so in August 2021, 4 months after the pregnancy was confirmed] and (2) went to Iceland, the FIFA regulation which came into effect January 2021 could not be applied, and therefore French law would dominate.

FIFA ruled in SBG's favor because they determined it was Lyon's "duty" to have informed SBG of the financial repercussions, which they failed to do. FIFA argued that the club's duty to inform the player is predominant over the player's duty to inform themselves. FIFA also argued that SBG was negligent in her own duty to inform herself of the statutes in question. The FIFA regulations set forth in January 2021 stated the protection for pregnant players kicked in once the pregnancy was officially confirmed to the club.

Lyon also contested further allegations in the dispute. SBG argues that there was radio silence from the club; Bompastor said in an interview that was inaccurate, that both Abily and Segui had followed up with SBG during her time in Iceland.

Bompastor also argued that the reduced playing time was a coaching decision and reflective of Lyon's roster rather than retribution towards SBG. She points out that Lyon's midfield was significantly more stacked than when SBG had left on (maternity) leave and there would be increased competition for playing time. Bompastor also confirmed that she was the one who decided not to extend SBG's contract and remained firm it was for sporting reasons, not a personal vendetta.

Lyon also put out a statement: their support structure remained the same for both SBG and Amel Majri ("Majri"). Lyon argued they did offer to pay the full costs of a nanny and would allow the infant to travel with SBG during away games. But they wanted to do a test first to see how it would work and what adjustments would need to be made. SBG objected on the grounds that she didn't want to be an experiment; Lyon argued that same structure remained in place for Majri, and it was a question of logistics, not discriminatory. There is nothing to suggest that Majri's away trip with her daughter was anything other than Lyon trying to sort out the same logistical issues they had anticipated with SBG's case.

So it comes down to this: Lyon lost the case on a technicality. FIFA regulations, put in place in January 2021 (3 months before SBG knew of her pregnancy and 4 months before SBG alerted the club), said that it was the club's obligation to notify the player of any economic ramifications of going on maternity leave and the club's obligation to offer "alternative employment". Because they didn't, SBG was therefore entitled to her normal salary.

Had that ruling not been in effect in January 2021, Lyon would have won their case.

So I think this is important: Lyon wasn't being the vindictive sociopaths so many WSL blogs are suddenly claiming. It came down to a case of jurisdiction which ended up being won on a technicality.

EDIT - added the important part of the ruling for all the Tumblr JDs out there.

[femftbllvr]

[gurxreiten]

That person defending their club and saying we can’t read….oooh the irony. What you highlighted does not make your club look good 😂😂😂😂😂😂

yeah! Plus it’s funny that the person is assuming we’re the ones not reading stuff here when in a 1 min search you get the info about Fifa rules.

[kyokuma]

2024-2-4 vs Juventus