RFU chief Bill Sweeney ‘wanted to defer’ controversial bonus payment
Sweeney received a £742,000 salary and £358,000 bonus in 2023-24, while the RFU posted a record operating loss of £37.9m and made 42 staff redundant.
Bill Sweeney, the under-fire chief executive of the Rugby Football Union, has revealed he wanted to defer the controversial bonus payment that has led to calls for his removal.
The RFU has agreed to hold a special general meeting, at which Sweeney will face moves to end his tenure, after the Guinness Six Nations.
Annual accounts published in November revealed Sweeney received pay of £1.1million for the 2023-24 financial year, comprising of an increased salary of £742,000 and a bonus of £358,000.
Further bonuses totalling almost £1m were paid to a five other executives even though the RFU reported a record operating loss of £37.9m and made 42 staff redundant.
Speaking to The Good, The Bad and The Rugby podcast, Sweeney said he had been unable to push back his long-term incentive payment.
“I knew it was going be a major problem, quite a way before it was done,” he said.
“I wanted to defer it, so I said, ‘Why are we paying this in ’23-24? Why don’t we defer to ’25 or ’27?’
“The problem is, once you’ve declared an incentive programme like this, it’s stated in your annual reports, and it was done previously, you accrue for it year after year.
“Even if it has been paid later, it still has to be announced and it still has to be taken in that year, so that wouldn’t have changed.”
Sweeney swept aside any suggestion that he should have rejected the bonus or offered it to charity.
“It’s a contracted commitment. You don’t have to take it…it’s contractually available,” he said.
“We didn’t request an LTIP, we had no say in the quantum of it, no say in what the amount should be. Giving it all to charity as a justification for why you’ve accepted the LTIP… I’m not sure that’s the right message.”
Sweeney did not hide away from the gravity of the current scrutiny on his organisation, but suggested the problems may run even deeper.
Asked if he felt the RFU was fit for purpose, he said: “I do think it is but I do think there are changes necessary.
“I don’t think applying the same structures we’ve in the RFU now that existed when the game went professional in ’95 and prior to that (works).
“I suppose the question would be is the RFU fit for purpose or is rugby fit for purpose? If you look at the various stakeholders are they all working together in the right way? That’s another bigger question.”
