I thought over half were free agents as of 31 May.

PFA should just work with the clubs to ensure that JobKeeper is in place for everyone - even those with less than a 12 month contract or those who are about to expire. 

Yes, but this article refers to the players contracted beyond 31 May. Not being paid represents a breach of their contract by the club. If a player requests help from PFA to represent/assist them through seeking an early release from their contract, then that is what the PFA state they will do. IMO Mel City will be in a position to reap the benefits here, along with Sydney. of cherry picking players.

Other visa players may elect to return home to sit out the pandemic and try and pick up the pieces. Local players will be at the mercy of the market essentially. That's if there is even a competition to return too. The way to stop this is the players being reinstated and deals being struck to repay the unpaid wages moving forward. If there is no return to matches and the comp ends, then some clubs will use this as a chance to clear the decks, especially of players who may have multi year contracts but have underperformed, or others that have long term injuries. 

IMO this is a time when the transitioning owners should be working with the FFA to restart the competition forcing clubs to reinstate players then go to the negitiation table to have wages slashed to enable clubs to survive. Players could then elect to leave on a free in mutiual termination circumstances, but provide certainty for contracted players. Wages moving forward will be generally lower as the supposed optus deal (or whoever) will be less and players will have to make their own mind up whether they want to stay in the (insert sponsor name) A League. 
 

Technically once a player under contract is not paid,the club is in breach.The players are not employees..
So players can walk away or seek payment in the courts.
When it come to the HAL......What a debacle.Only two teams with contracted players and no clear governing body running the show,because of the Foxsports fear factor.
It's like BBL....Clubs in name only ,that rise from nothing weeks before each season ,then disappear into hibernation  until the next resurrection.
Is that the right formula for longevity and fan engagement?
If there is a reboot down the track ,it would be nice if one prerequisite was for a club to have a clubhouse for fans.At least the club then becomes real.

The players are also in breach of contract. Contract is a two way thing and both parties need to benefit

How are the players in breach?

They aren't delivering the service for which they are being paid for

If you contract somebody to paint a house every month for 12 months, and the house burns down after 6 months, chances are you wont have to pay them out (depending on the wording of the contract). Even things like Foxtel or Telstra have contract termination fees but never the full amount

I'm a contractor and I have very clear wording in my main bread bringer contract that if the agency no longer requires my services they can suspend me or cut back the work. If the people I work for have to close down as a result of the virus, which is very likely, I wont continue to get paid

No different for players (unless there was a severe oversight by those who wrote the contract thinking something like this would never happen so might as well save the ink writing it)

The players aren't playing. They aren't delivering the service they are being paid for - regardless of the circumstances. They are in breach

That's incorrect. Professional footballers are not contractors, they are employees. Contractors run their own business and sell a service to another business or individual. That's not what is happening with football players. They have employee contracts not SLA contracts.

Its still a contract instead of a full time, part time or casual employee arrangement

https://www.wikihow.com/Get-Out-of-an-Employment-Contract

Dude they aren't in breach of contract - they just can't perform their contract because of a external issue out of their control. They are completely different things. 

If they were in breach the league could sue the players. The only way they would be in breach is if the league was still running and they decided not to play.

I get what you are saying you are just using the wrong terminology and one that has completely different legal obligations

Professional footballers are considered full-time employees. They have some different clauses in their employee contracts, but for all intents and purposes they are full-time employees. 

At the end of the day, unless we have access to the actual contracts between the clubs and players, it's difficult to speculate on what clubs can actually do.
It doesn't shed too much light on anything, but this is the standard player contract offered by the FFA. This is probably more for the lower leagues than the HAL, but there isn't that much in the termination section. https://www.ffa.com.au/sites/ffa/files/2019-08/NRR05%20Professional%20Player%20Contract%20%282019%29.pdf

We don't have to speculate. All we have to do is observe

The A League club owners have more legal knowledge than this forum combined given the millions they have spent their time making, and thorough understanding they would have had over the contracts they have written. You don't own a football club without an understanding of contract / employment law

The PFA, a group of volunteers, are being driven by emotion / self interest. Neither of these things hold up in court

If the actions by the owners were illegal or against any code the FFA would have stepped in a long time ago. Instead they have followed suit but with a large chunk of their own employees

At the end of the day the players are paid to play games. Some even hundreds of thousands of dollars. For whatever reason they are unable to fulfil those duties. I cant imagine any legal document that can bind a business to continue to pay out somebody under those circumstances and that is exactly what we are seeing happen

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer/melbourne-city-and-melbourne-victory-continue-to-pay-players-as-other-clubs-stand-down-20200401-p54g4u.html

City and Victory continue to pay players as other clubs stand them down

While the majority of A-League clubs have moved swiftly to stand down staff and players to cut costs during the coronavirus crisis, the two big Melbourne teams, Victory and City, are keeping their players on the payroll for now.

Victory's players came out of self-isolation on Monday afternoon having had to go into personal lock-down for 14 days on March 16, when they arrived back in Australia having played against Wellington Phoenix on the previous day, Sunday March 15.

Because of the shock move by the Federal government that Sunday afternoon to enforce strict quarantine procedures from midnight that night Victory could not get back from New Zealand in time before the deadline expired, meaning the players had to self-isolate.

They are still staying away from the club, but have been given individual training schedules to pursue while at home.

Victory is one of the richest of the A-League clubs and is one of few to regularly break even or turn a profit, so it may be in a better situation than many of their rivals who are scrambling to trim expenses in these turbulent times.

There is no A-League club better resourced than Melbourne City, however, as it is owned by one of the richest organisations in world soccer, the City Football Group, controlled by the UAE-based Abu Dhabi United Group which in turn is owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahayan, a member of the Abu Dhabi Royal Family and the country's minister of presidential affairs.

City players - who figured in what could have been the last A-League match of the season in Newcastle on Monday March 23 - have not been laid off.

''Our players have been told to stay at home, observe the protocols and have been given individually tailored training programmes to keep fit during this period,'' a spokesman said.

The FFA had said last month that they would review whether the league would continue or not on April 22, so City and Victory are using that as a target date. However, few in the game expect any football to be given the go ahead at that point.

Western United, the other Victorian club, is considering its position and has not stood down its players yet although there has been speculation that the league's newest club might take such action.

Perth Glory, Central Coast and Western Sydney Wanderers have already stood down players and staff, while Adelaide, Newcastle and Brisbane Roar are other clubs reportedly on the verge of doing so.

The unilateral response has prompted an angry reaction from the players union the Professional Footballers Association, whose boss John Didulica has slammed the clubs and the way they have reacted, saying they should take a leaf out of the play-books used by the AFL and NRL who dealt in a consensual manner.

“Whether it is one club or all 11 clubs, our position on this will not change. We will continue to fight for the players who have been dumped and preserve their legal rights, including challenging the stand down notices and, where instructed, seek free agency on the basis of this breach of contract, '' Didulica says.

“We have significant concerns about the impact the decisions of club owners are having on the wellbeing of our members, many of whom now face long term unemployment."

“It is entirely unnecessary for club owners to place their players in this situation when there is an alternative option – which is for the sport to work together - as we’ve seen across other mature and sophisticated sports."

"Actions not anchored in finding common solutions can only hurt. Short-term opportunism is coming at the expense of leadership and the long-term thinking that is now necessary."

When you get a situation where the actual livelihood of entire industries are at stake all bets are off. Contracts are worth nothing - bacause if push come to shove the business will just CLOSE DOWN. So this is where we find ourselves. The contract mean nothing and both parties will try and use what leverage they have. 

Then is becomes a case of good luck chasing bad money through the court system....

It's probably more the case that the contracts have nothing in them relating to anything like the situation we have now. 

Contract law, insurance and risk management is built around situations like this. I'd be very surprised if that were the case

This is no different to a club going belly up and folding mid season with the FFA having no way to pay the team out. A very realistic scenario, just not for all 11 clubs at once

S524(1)c of the Fair Work Act  2009 does provide for Stand Down  orders,if employees cannot be usefully employed,because of stoppage of work for which the employer cannot be held responsible,
They dont have to be paid but may accrue  entitlements .
But there are all sorts of checks and balances on the employer that initiates a Stand Down order and the onus of proof is on them.
Otherwise the Fair Works Commission (FWC) and Ombudsman  can  be barking on their heels.If an employee seeks recompense.
Considering the Government has guaranteed payments under the Job Keeper Allowance,Logically all those players and staff stood down willl be receiving this payment.

Those players not under contract after the 31May will be unemployed.
Payment of accrued entiltlements would have to be decided by  mediation  after an action under S256 to the FWC.

No money no contract..

During the GFC I saw large companies walk away from 100 million dollar contracts. That or go bankrupt.