In a nutshell, what is the RFU pay dispute?
When the Rugby Football Union published its annual report at the end of November, on the back of a lacklustre autumn campaign for England, it emerged the chief executive, Bill Sweeney, was paid £1.1m for the year ending June 2024, which included a one-off £358,000 bonus as part of a long-term incentive plan (LTIP) scheme. It also emerged five other executive directors shared a bonus of close to £1m while the annual report showed record losses to reserves of £42m. In the ensuing weeks the calls for the chairman, Tom Ilube, and Sweeney to go have grown louder across all levels of the English game.
Why is executive pay such a contentious issue?
Put simply, because it made Sweeney the best paid chief executive at a British sports governing body – excluding payouts – at a time when the union announced record losses and 42 redundancies. While the RFU council was well briefed on the losses – expected in a World Cup year – they were given scant warning about the pay hikes. There are those who sympathise with Sweeney insofar as he was offered the terms of the LTIP and understandably accepted it but why it was instigated in the first place has united the game in anger. The RFU’s justification for the scheme is that executives took a pay cut during the pandemic and this is the reward for steering the union through it. That has gone down badly with England players who also took a Covid pay cut while Championship clubs have seen their funding slashed repeatedly. The metrics against which the LTIP has been judged have also caused consternation, not least the decision to combine the results of the men’s and women’s teams when gauging England’s winning percentage.
So why is it RFU chairman Ilube who has stepped down?
The pay scandal – and the manner in which it has been handled – has proved the catalyst for a full-blown rebellion. The 62-strong RFU council can call an emergency meeting and table a vote of no confidence in the board of directors if 20 members agree. The RFU president, Rob Udwin, got wind that was imminent and called an emergency meeting on Wednesday – at which neither Ilube nor Sweeney were present – in an attempt to quell the particular revolt, inviting the former chairman Andy Cosslett to attend and explain the context of the LTIP scheme. Even before that meeting, however, the council had formally requested an emergency meeting on 10 January – at which a vote of no confidence could theoretically be held – to review the RFU’s governance. After Wednesday’s meeting – which lasted more than four hours and was described by one member as “the night of the long knives” – it was determined an independent review into the pay bonuses would be commissioned. The RFU also finally acknowledged the reputational damage the scandal had done but the writing was on the wall when Udwin summoned Ilube and Sweeney for urgent talks on Thursday. Not least because, in addition to the council’s rebellion, a grassroots campaign to remove Ilube and Sweeney has been taking shape. If 100 of the RFU’s member clubs request a special general meeting (SGM), Sweeney must call it within 45 days and, as of earlier this week, the rebels had comfortably met the numbers. Against that backdrop, Ilube has stepped down because “recent events have become a distraction from the game”.
What does this mean for Sweeney?
The rebels have one head on a spike but bloodlust for a second remains. That Sweeney has overseen a series of crises in the three years for which he was so handsomely rewarded has rankled. Worcester, London Irish, Wasps and Jersey went to the wall, Eddie Jones was sacked and the lowering of the tackle height in the amateur game was handled abysmally. More recently, under Steve Borthwick, England have slumped to seventh in the world rankings. Ultimately though, it is the board who decide Sweeney’s fate so whoever replaces Ilube when he eventually departs as chair of it will be key. Bill Beaumont, who held the role between 2012 and 2016 and stepped down as World Rugby chairman in November, is the best possible appointment for Sweeney. Beaumont is well respected across the game; having taken on the role on an interim basis he is considered a safe pair of hands and someone who may be able to temper some of the outcry with his well-refined snug bar charm. At 72, he hardly screams “new broom”, however, and rebels want complete regime change. As such, an SGM remains a likely proposition.
