Money is on the minds of players at the Australian Open, but not the record $111.5m prize pool. Instead, a heated pay fight has athletes challenging calls in a different court – taking legal action against tennis authorities.
Although it has settled with Tennis Australia, the Professional Tennis Players’ Association is suing the sport’s other Grand Slam organisers and governing bodies over claims a ‘cartel-like’ system is ‘artificially suppressing player compensation, dictating punishing schedules, enforcing restrictive participation requirements and limiting sponsorship opportunities.’
For business leaders watching the tennis dispute unfold, these workplace dynamics may feel uncomfortably familiar. Whether in the office or on centre court, pay conversations can be tough to navigate and can quickly spiral when not handled with care.
Pay Conflicts Are Usually About More Than Just Dollars
As an expert in compensation strategy, Matt McFarlane helps businesses craft salary bands, design pay transparency rollouts and build career frameworks. He’s seen how easily emotion can creep into pay conversations. “I think often by the time it surfaces into a discussion with the employer, it’s a volcano topic. It’s often very heated, There’s a lot of things that have snowballed into that conversation,” he explains.
He says misunderstanding is at the heart of many pay conflicts, particularly in relation to fairness. “It fundamentally comes down to both parties having a shared understanding around what fair means,” he says. And, often, there is no shared definition. “Fairness is subjective. Fairness really needs to be defined by the organisation.”
Fairness is also a central gripe in the tennis dispute, with players unhappy they receive only 17 per cent of the game’s revenue, compared to 35 to 50 per cent for sports like golf, basketball, and American football. And while the top players earn millions, competitors ranked lower than 150 can struggle to break even.
Silence Can Make Pay Conversations Even Harder
Tennis stars have also complained about a lack of input into the governance of the game, particularly in relation to scheduling, which requires them to move from tournament to tournament 45 weeks of the year and often play beyond midnight.
McFarlane says it’s common for employees of any kind to harbour resentment when they feel they’re being denied a seat at the table, especially in relation to pay and conditions. He recommends leaders involve staff whenever possible. “Being able to have a conversation with them and say, ‘Hey, of the things that we offer from a benefits perspective, what works and what doesn’t? What are the things that are meaningful to you?’”
Speaking openly about an employee’s value also breeds trust, McFarlane says. “If you think about how to create a high-performance environment, the secret sauce is trust. Nothing builds trust more than saying, ‘We want to make sure that the things we’re offering to you actually work for you.’”
Avoid Awkward Pay Chats With Structure And Transparency
The tennis dispute highlights what can happen when compensation systems lack clear frameworks. McFarlane sees the same pattern play out in workplaces where pay discussions can happen in an ad hoc way, leaving both leaders and employees uncomfortable. “Often managers themselves don’t necessarily feel equipped to be able to deal with it,” he says.
His solution is to embed pay conversations into formal processes rather than treating them as awkward negotiations that arise only when someone asks for a raise. “I encourage companies to have this part of their onboarding,” McFarlane says. He says setting expectations from day one removes uncertainty about progression, and incorporating data into the process can create transparency. “You lead on the front foot and say, ‘Hey, we determine your pay by purchasing this set of market data, which gives us a sense of what the role is worth in the market. Here’s how often we review it. Here’s the kind of things that go into reviewing it.’ It takes that completely away as being something they have to start thinking about maybe six months in.”
Employment Hero Managing Director of Talent Solutions David Holland agrees data-led tools can help SMEs take emotion out of pay discussions altogether. “When employers use real data to shape pay discussions, they remove a lot of ambiguity and build confidence on both sides of the table,” he said, adding that the benefits of online HR platforms stretch beyond compensation. “Whether it’s hiring or salary discussions, or using AI to filter unsuitable interview candidates, SMEs that adopt structured, data-backed workflows are better placed to retain staff and grow sustainably.”
McFarlane expects transparency around compensation will improve away from the tennis court, thanks to a generational shift. “Speak to anyone under the age of 30, and I think they’d be more comfortable to tell you what they’re earning and then have a conversation,” he says “It’s something that happens very freely, and companies have to play catch up. The expectations around pay, and the taboo topic that it once was is no more.”
