The players benefit from the changes

(published in Slovak Sport daily)

Minimum standards for player contracts and FIFA’s stricter stance on unpaid wages will be a help.

The new football registration and transfer regulations, set to take effect on June 15 of this year, are revolutionary by Slovak standards. That opening line from a Sport Daily editorial (A necessary transfer revolution, April 1, 2015) is hard to disagree with. Several of the changes are in players’ favour and they should start using them immediately. Especially to defend themselves more effectively when wages go unpaid. Unfortunately, that key area is where the current regulations, still in effect, have proved inadequate.

The regulation’s adoption was a long process. All relevant parties were involved, and several months were left between the approval date (February 10, 2015) and its planned enforcement. That’s time players and club representatives should use to thoroughly familiarize themselves with the new rules. This is how all important regulations should be adopted across other sports federations too. In this regard, the Slovak Football Association (SFZ) could serve as a model.

This article focuses on key aspects of the player-club relationship, rather than the regulation as a whole.

The new regulations incorporate into Slovak law the Agreement on Minimum Requirements for Standard Player Contracts in Professional Football within the EU. Admittedly, this comes three years after the agreement was signed in April 2012 by UEFA, player associations, leagues, and clubs, but better late than never. Players should read the full text and actively refer to it when signing contracts. Here are a few key points worth noting:

If a player breaches contractual obligations, the club may impose fines or other penalties, in line with its internal disciplinary rules. That’s standard practice in most clubs. However, under the agreement and the new regulations, the player must have the right to appeal the club’s decision and to be represented or accompanied—by the team captain, a player union rep, or union delegate. In England, for instance, appeals like these are common. This formal process and the option of representation help prevent emotional or baseless penalties for poor performances or other questionable reasons.

Contracts must also include provisions on the protection of human rights, particularly guaranteeing freedom of expression and prohibiting discrimination. One example to consider is when a player is sent to train alone, often under harsher conditions (e.g., double training sessions), without cause, while others are not subjected to the same. These practices are not uncommon, but under the new rules, they could qualify as discriminatory.

Players also have the right to a second medical opinion from another sports doctor if they disagree with the club doctor’s assessment, and even a third independent opinion in case of conflicting diagnoses.

Contracts must now explicitly grant both players and clubs equal rights to negotiate extensions or early termination. Any early termination must be based on legitimate grounds and carried out in accordance with the regulation or by mutual agreement. In other words, clubs will no longer be able to end contracts unilaterally with ease, while players are bogged down by lengthy, complicated procedures. If either side fails to fulfill specific contractual obligations despite prior written warning, the other side has the right to terminate the deal unilaterally.

Just before the Slovak regulations were finalized, FIFA toughened its own stance on unpaid wages. On March 1, 2015, Article 12bis was added to the international transfer regulations. Now, if a club fails to pay a player or another club within 30 days of the due date, it risks sanctions. (...)

It’s puzzling that, in April 2015, SFZ representatives still emphasized a domestic rule stating that a player must go unpaid for any three months over a twelve-month period to terminate the contract.  (...)  In this case, we’re not trailing UEFA by three years (as we did with the minimum contract standards), but FIFA by less than two months. The solution is simple: update the Slovak rulebook by mid-June. If that doesn’t happen, players can already invoke FIFA rules, which take precedence. Some clubs may want to take note.

One last point—well established in FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber case law but now also part of the Slovak regulations: the party that breaches the contract must compensate the other side. For example, if a club fails to pay wages in the first year of a four-year deal, and the player terminates early for that reason, the club not only owes the unpaid wages but also a compensation amount, typically the remaining value of the contract. If the player was earning €1,000/month, compensation could total €36,000. If the player later signs a new deal at a lower salary, the new income is deducted from the compensation. And if the contract was breached during the so-called protected period (the first three years), the club faces a two-window transfer ban.

FIFA’s respected case law and its stable international transfer framework may have a positive impact on Slovak football too.

The new Slovak regulations are modern and European in scope, and they can serve the sport well for a long time. But they must be properly enforced. Stronger outreach from the Slovak Football Association—toward both players and clubs—would be a welcome step.