The A-League 2026-27 season is drawing closer, and the biggest story in the Australian men's and women's top-flight is... an industrial dispute. Don't you just love it? Everyone knows the real way to get people excited for a new campaign, fresh off another World Cup and with young, former A-League products making big moves overseas, is to get the discourse centred on contract law.
You may have seen on Wednesday that League chief executive Steve Rosich addressed media about league administrators the Australian Professional Leagues (APL) next steps in their attempts to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with its players, just weeks after talks with players' union Professional Footballers Australia (PFA) looked to break down.
Confused by what's going on? Need to catch up? ESPN has you covered.
- Sydney Super Cup reignites a complex, age-old debate in Australia
- CBA impasse a symptom of an A-League that is lacking direction
- Ex A-League Women champs rescued by owners of NRL club
Wait... what happened to the A-League CBA? And just what is a CBA?
For the past half-decade, the A-League Men (ALM) and the A-League Women (ALW) have been governed by a five-year CBA signed back in 2021, one that expired on June 30 and needed to be replaced. While expectations of another multiyear pact faded as the deadline neared and eventually expired, the thinking was that a new one, even if it was just a short-term proposition, would arrive last month.
That was until negotiations ground to a halt when the players unanimously rejected a proposed one-year, stopgap agreement put forward by the league and walked away, declaring that the process "has been exhausted," and calling for talks to shift towards a longer-term mindset that would include structural reform. It seemingly caught the APL off guard, with Rosich putting out a statement saying the league had "sought an explanation" over the move, and setting the table for Wednesday's events.
As for what a CBA is? Well, it's a legally binding agreement between an employer -- in this case, the APL on behalf of A-League clubs -- and a group of employees that bargain as a collective -- in this case, ALM and ALM players, represented by the PFA -- that lays out the rules and frameworks for how the two interact. In the A-Leagues' case, this not only covers things such as working conditions, but also how contracts can be structured and even league-wide regulations such as the salary cap.
Ok, so why did the PFA walk away?
Effectively, players' frustration has grown, and their patience has worn thin, ever since the league unbundled from Football Australia and the APL -- which is a collective body made up of the league's clubs -- took over the day-to-day operations of the league.
After hearing promises that league owners needed the keys so they could unlock the A-Leagues' commercial potential, players had watched on as the competition instead lurched from one crisis to another over the course of the previous CBA. And while some factors were outside of the competition's control -- the COVID-19 pandemic, for instance -- plenty of others -- the Grand Final sell-off, KEEPUP, expansion delays -- were the result of strategic missteps and outright errors by successive competition administrations.
These adverse developments had led to a shift in ideology from the league towards what it saw as a more sustainable model, but the PFA didn't entirely agree with their determination on that front either and, probably more relevantly, didn't trust them to be able to execute even if they felt it was the right course of action.
Tensions were also frayed when the league flagged a hard salary cap as if it were a done deal (that proposal was eventually dropped during talks) and not soothed by growing tension over conflicting strategic matters such as the ALW's transition to full professionalism.
In short, players didn't trust the league at the bargaining or boardroom table and their desire to secure a new stopgap agreement was superseded by one to address their long-term concerns.
Can the season start without a CBA? Is it going to be postponed?
Yes, both the ALM and ALW can kick off without a CBA -- figures across the league have increasingly spoken about that being the most likely outcome ever since the PFA broke off talks, and ESPN understands the union began to advise players to prepare for the scenario in recent weeks.
It's worth remembering that the ALM actually operated without a CBA for the first three years of its existence and while the absence of a CBA does allow for industrial action to take place, there are plenty of tools in both the players' and league's belts available before they need to reach for strike action or a lockout.
How has the league responded to the union?
Rosich spoke to media on Wednesday -- and as it's not the first time he's spoken to the press, that puts him well ahead of APL chairperson Stephen Conroy during his time serving as executive chair -- outlining a counter proposal to the PFA, as well as steps the league had taken to fill the regulatory void where the CBA would normally go.
This includes the issuing of player contract regulations to clubs that are in line with matters agreed in principle before talks were abandoned, as well as a series of new, improved offers on unresolved matters that centred on the women's game.
While existing Australian employer law already entitles players to a requisite level of protection, this more football-tailored framework will give A-League clubs and players the ability to negotiate contracts and plan for the season with a greater level of clarity, given that even if a new deal is struck, these new numbers will now ostensibly represent the floor of any deal. It will also reassure broadcasters and sponsors that the season will go ahead.
Beyond calling for "good faith" negotiations for a one-year CBA to resume, the APL also set out an offer to begin talks for a longer-term agreement that was envisioned to be agreed by next March.
So what exactly is happening with the A-League Women?
The ALW appears to be one of the key battlegrounds between the APL and PFA, with the former saying in its lengthy statement that it had come to an accord on 52 of 53 items in talks with players, with wages in the competition the lone outstanding matter.
To address this, the league's proposal on Wednesday floated increasing the women's salary cap to $AUD 900,000 -- up from the existing cap of $AUD 600,000 and their previous offer of $775,000- - as well as the exclusion of pro-rata amounts associated with women's contracts beyond the league standard 38 weeks and the allocation of three marquee players slots for clubs, up from the two proposed during talks.
Further, amid a flood of players leaving the competition for overseas leagues and with rival domestic codes' remuneration rapidly accelerating away, the APL said that it was "committed to setting a pathway to full-time professionalism for ALW players, with the aim of having a mutually-agreed plan in place within 12 months."
Full-time professionalism for the ALW has long been one of the PFA's most steadfast positions, as evidenced by their 'Ready for Takeoff' report released last year.
"We're fighting for the future of football here in Australia, especially women's football," Melbourne City captain Rebekah Stott told ESPN in late July. "We want to get better standards and better working conditions.
"You look at the rest of the world, and it's going up and up, and it doesn't seem like it's happening here. So [we're] making a stand now to hopefully make the future better for football here in Australia."
Now there's also talk of enterprise and industry agreements? When did they appear?
A new development, and in line with their frustrations with both CBA talks and the league's long-term future, the PFA wrote to the APL last month to flag the possibility of moving towards enterprise and industry agreements, which the union felt would better address the limitations it saw in the CBA's scope.
With an enterprise agreement able to cover the protection of basic rights such as minimum wages and standards across the league, it envisioned the industry agreement -- which would require Fair Work Commission sign-off -- being more far-reaching and giving players greater ability to influence the A-Leagues' future direction.
This proposal generated the most confrontational response from the APL, outright rejecting the idea on Wednesday and declaring it not fit for purpose.
"As there is no modern award covering athletes in a professional competition in Australia, the arrangement being suggested for the A-Leagues in this case is simply not fit-for-purpose. For the players themselves, we're not convinced that the proposed arrangements can deliver what the PFA are seeking. In fact, on several points, we believe such arrangements would lead to the opposite outcome for players", Rosich said.
How did the PFA respond to the latest developments? Is a deal now going to get done?
Well, the union didn't come out and reject the APL's new proposal straight away. And they have seemingly extracted concessions from the league. But they also weren't exactly happy to see the league doing the media rounds just hours after chief executive Beau Bush received the proposal, either.
"The PFA this afternoon received correspondence from the APL in relation to A-Leagues CBA," Busch said in a statement. "Rather than allowing the players a reasonable opportunity to fully consider it, the APL has instead immediately announced it in the media, revealing a fundamental misunderstanding of how good-faith bargaining works.
"The players deserve the respect of hearing directly about proposals that affect their careers through a genuine process, rather than reading about them in the media. The players overwhelmingly rejected the APL's previous final offer due to a fundamental lack of trust that it would have secured the leagues' futures after years of mismanagement.
"The APL's conduct continues to erode that trust. It is disappointing that the APL has attempted to wedge the players with media tactics instead of engaging appropriately.
"We will now carefully review the APL's letter and will consider its contents with our members in the coming days. Five years of underperformance by the APL has left the game in an incredibly precarious position. Any new proposal will only be accepted by the players if it promises genuine transformation."
So, yeah, it's not a no. But talks aren't exactly moving forward in a friendly manner, either.
Could there be a strike?
Yes, there could be. It's not likely, and there will be plenty of clear warning signs and missed off-ramps before we get there. But because there's no CBA in place that would prevent it, there could be.
To be clear, everyone involved knows that strike action is the reddest of big red buttons for the players to push. And everyone involved also knows that the hit the league would take from such a course of action -- from a commercial sense, reputational sense, footballing sense, and beyond -- would be devastating. And there's plenty of other types of industrial action, such as media and commercial boycotts (à la the NRL) that can be deployed then.
"[It] doesn't make sense to be discussed," Rosich said when asked about strike action. "The majority of players are contracted, particularly in the men's.
"We've got a framework to take us forward, which is reflective of the now and includes some important increases in the women's.
"We think we're well placed. Clubs have been getting on with business. It's clear that players have been getting on with business and re-contracting with their clubs, both men and women, and it should be a great start on October 16."