The organisations “believe that these decisions violate the rights of players and their unions under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights while also potentially violating EU competition law”, the global professional footballers union FIFPRO said in a statement.
With the support of FIFPRO, UNFP and PFA have asked the Brussels Commercial Court to refer the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union by putting forward “four questions for a preliminary ruling”.
“Players and their unions have consistently highlighted the current football calendar as overloaded and unworkable”, the unions said in their statement.
In early May, FIFPRO and the World Association of Football Leagues had already threatened FIFA with legal action.
The players’ representatives accuse FIFA of having “continued a programme of competition expansion despite the opposition of player unions”, in particular by expanding the Club World Cup from seven to 32 teams.
“The most in-demand players are now part of an endless schedule of games and competitions for club and country, with their limits constantly being pushed through expansion and the creation of new competitions,” said PFA general manager Maheta Molango.
The two unions point to a possible violation by FIFA of the right of European workers to “collectively bargain over their terms and conditions of employment” and their right to “healthy friendly working conditions”, as provided for in European law.
They also cite the ECJ’s ruling in the Super League case last December as evidence that FIFA is restricting competition law in a “unilateral and discretionary” manner.
FIFA has not commented, but sources close to the governing body point out that the international match calendar was signed off by its ruling Council which features representation from all continental confederations, including UEFA.
They also insist that the calendar was the result of extensive consultation, and reject any suggestion that it was imposed on the football community.
AFP