HIGH performance managers are expressing concern at the way leave entitlements - enshrined in the AFL Players' Collective Bargaining Agreement - are structured.
The issue was raised last week when club high performance managers met at the AFL, suggesting the current arrangements were, in their opinion, too rigid to give players the best chance of maximising performance while also leading balanced lives.
Supportive of the need for improved work-life balance, the high performance managers were not arguing for less leave for players, but believed that having their voice at the table when holiday arrangements were being discussed would improve the way leave was structured.
High performance managers argue that their desire to improve and support player wellbeing is as strong as the AFL Players Association.
AFL.com.au understands high performance managers are frustrated at being defined as merely interested in the physical preparation of players when they are concerned with taking a holistic approach to a players' wellbeing.
The high performance managers say that incorporates physical, emotional and social development.
The AFLPA's Player development manager Brett Johnson told AFL.com.au the players association had always understood the importance of consultation with high performance managers.
"Moving forward we want to make sure we include them in the conversation as well as football managers, player development managers, coaches," Johnson said.
"We want to be open and transparent about what we're doing."
Leave arrangements for players became much more rigid at the end of 2013 after former AFL chief Andrew Demetriou and the AFL Commission supported an AFLPA push to restrict access of clubs to players at certain times of the year.
The collective bargaining agreement also enshrined a day off per week to allow players to engage in more activities away from football.
The AFL has been very supportive of strategies designed to improve work-life balance but AFL.com.au understands football department personnel at some clubs have been frustrated with current arrangements.
It is the view of many football departments that the prescribed time could be arranged in a way that better takes into account individual needs and programs ensuring the twin objectives of high performance and work-balance are met.
This week Carlton's respected high performance manager David Buttifant made a presentation to AFL and player association representatives attending the occupational health and safety committee to outline suggestions on how they thought the system might be improved.
The main point Buttifant made was that individual leave should be tailored to individuals suiting their programs, time in the game, age and other relevant factors.
One example he gave was that rather than the players' scheduled breaks of three days each between the new year and the first pre-season match being set in stone, some players might be better served with a six-day break rather than two three-day breaks.
Johnson said the AFLPA was open to such discussion as long as they were included upfront in the conversation.
"Whether it's a particular player that might need to be monitored a bit more over the leave period then we're happy to have that conversation," Johnson said.
"We'd deal with their agent and make sure the player is OK with it and then go from there. So we're absolutely open to being flexible around these things."
Carlton veteran Chris Judd had more leave before Christmas than is set under the CBA, while some younger players at the Blues decided to have extra sessions away from the club before returning.
Although there is ongoing assessment of leave arrangements, any significant changes are more likely to be considered during the next round of collective bargaining negotiations rather than the end of this season.
The existing CBA runs until the end of 2016.
