The Football Association of Ireland is in the news again, although granted, they’re rarely out of it. This time, just a few days after they announced that they are looking to reduce staff numbers by up to 30 per cent in an effort to chip away at their €40 million debt, came news that Eileen Gleeson is suing them. When it rains at Abbotstown, it invariably buckets down.
The former manager of the women’s national team has accused the FAI of discriminating against her due to her gender and the gender of the team and has made a series of allegations about the association’s treatment of her and her players during her time in charge.
What’s it all about? Here’s an attempt to explain.
Tell us about Eileen Gleeson.
The 53-year-old Dubliner has been involved in football for the bulk of her life, first as a player and then as a coach and administrator. The Uefa Pro Licence holder, who had spells in charge of Peamount United, UCD Waves and Glasgow City, spent two years as assistant to then Republic of Ireland manager Vera Pauw. In 2023, the FAI appointed her as their head of women’s and girls’ football.
How did she end up managing Ireland?
After the FAI and Pauw parted company, Gleeson was appointed interim coach in August 2023 before her position was made permanent the following December. But defeat by Wales in the Euro 2025 qualifying play-offs last December ultimately led to the FAI opting not to renew her contract.
What then?
She remained an employee of the FAI, confusion over her role finally cleared up when it was announced that she had been made “head of football strategic insights and planning", a position she still holds.
So, what’s this legal case about?
As revealed by the Sunday Independent’s Mark Tighe, there are several detailed allegations in the case filed by Gleeson’s legal team earlier this summer, accusations of gender discrimination central to them all. A number of examples of how the FAI prioritised the men’s team over the women are cited, Gleeson claiming that the women were underfunded and under-resourced.
She also claims she was coerced into taking the role of interim manager when she wanted to remain head of women’s and girls’ football. She contrasted the FAI’s treatment of her in this situation with how they dealt with John O’Shea when he took over as interim manager following Stephen Kenny’s departure from the role.
One striking allegation is that the FAI failed to provide security for the women’s team, as they do for the men, despite a number of troubling incidents – including a man attempting to physically assault a player at Dublin Airport and, bizarrely, another videoing the players in a hotel diningroom before walking into their medical room wearing a bathrobe.
Is there a standout claim?
In terms of the repercussions it might have should Gleeson prevail, the big one is her claim that, under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2015, the FAI breached her right to equal pay with the manager of the men’s national team. Gleeson was paid a salary of about €100,000, compared with the €650,000 Heimir Hallgrímsson receives for managing the men.
But isn’t that the norm in football?
It is – the hugely successful England women’s manager Sarina Wiegman, for example, is on about £400,000 (€460,000) a year, while the men’s manager, Thomas Tuchel, has a salary of . . . £5 million.
Isn’t that reasonable when you compare the revenue that the men and women bring in?
That, you’d imagine, will be the central part of the defence against the claim. Even with their recent struggles, the Irish men bring in considerably more than the women in terms of match-day revenue, broadcast deals and commercial partnerships. Just taking ticket sales for home games, Ireland’s women averaged crowds of 18,000 under Gleeson, whereas it’s 40,000 so far under Hallgrímsson.
Add to that the contrast in the market value of managers in the men’s and women’s game?
Yep. If the FAI had only offered a salary of €100,000 for the men’s job, the list of applicants would have been, well, less than stellar. Even that €650,000 is modest by international standards. Carlo Ancelotti is the best paid international manager in the world, earning €9.5 million a year. Mind you, he’s expected to win the World Cup with Brazil, so the demands are somewhat loftier than they are in Ireland.
The highest paid female international manager is Emma Hayes. When the United States appointed her, she was put, with much fanfare, on the same salary, about €1.5 million, as their men’s manager, Gregg Berhalter. But when Mauricio Pochettino replaced Berhalter, his salary was €5 million, so the parity didn’t last long. Even the biggest names in the women’s game, then, such as Hayes and Wiegman, earn considerably less than their male equivalents.
So Gleeson hasn’t a chance of winning on this one, surely?
Well, under the Employment Equality Act, employees of the same company should receive equal pay if they do “like work”. That means that they “both perform the same work under the same or similar conditions”. There’s no mention of how much revenue the fruits of their labour brings in.
Crikey, she could win?
Hold your horses. Focusing on two words, “like work”, in an act that extends to 50,000 words will have the legal eagles rolling in the aisles. There’s a reason they earn almost as much as Ancelotti, they read the other 49,998 and pick out the ones that count.
When your knowledge of the law extends to watching a couple of episodes of Judge Judy, it’s best to consult someone a bit better qualified. We did that, and the gist of their opinion is that it could indeed all hinge on how “like work” is defined when it comes to determining whether the contrasting financial status of the men’s and women’s games will be taken in to account.
What else did they say?
A noteworthy take was that male managers of women’s teams aren’t, on the whole, paid any more than female managers of women’s team. Colin Bell, Pauw’s predecessor, was, for example, paid a fraction of his male counterparts, Martin O’Nell and then Mick McCarthy. So does that make irrelevant the gender of the manager of our women’s team when it comes to the pay parity dispute? Does the case solely focus on the gender of the team itself?
Probably?
Possibly. After that, it will come down to whether the judge takes a narrow look at the case – same employers, same job title, so should be same pay – or goes wider and looks at those market value issues and the contrast in the revenue the men’s and women’s games bring in.
The likelihood?
No clue, but if Gleeson was to win on this issue, the repercussions could, frankly, be humongous. Not just for the FAI if they had to pay out half million or so to her, and maybe even have to compensate her more recent predecessors if they were to make a claim, but for every other sport in Ireland too.
If a precedent is set, might the IRFU have to pay Scott Bemand the same as Andy Farrell? Would Shamrock Rovers have to pay Stephanie Zambra the same as Stephen Bradley? The GAA won’t be affected because, as we know, their managers, at club and intercounty level, aren’t paid at all. (Stop chuckling at the back).
It would, of course, be a landmark day for women in sport if the case was won, but you’d wonder about the consequences for women’s sport in general. If, say, League of Ireland clubs cannot afford pay parity, would they end up ditching the women’s side of their operations?
Jeepers, landmark is the word
Truly.
