Unionization of Northwestern athletics against NCAA

Posted by $ jbrenner 11 years, 10 months ago to News
44 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

The National Labor Relations Board in Chicago said that Northwestern's football team can unionize. I detest unions, but I can't say I like the NCAA either. Are the student-athletes employees or not?

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 11 years, 10 months ago
    Detest unions too. However, college athletics is a sham. At one time it was to round out academics with athleticism and sportsmanship. Now a majority of participants don't belong in college at all. Rather college athletics is a serious $-making business, like the NFL, and these are not students, but just working/training athletes. Therein lies the interest in unionizing.
    Notice it is football, not women's lacrosse that is unionizing.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by RonC 11 years, 10 months ago
    NCAA is a cartel designed to protect the overall viability of college sports. Once in a while someone has to take one for the team. A few years ago it was Pete Carroll. After that it was Jim Tressell. You can throw in Penn State and Papa Joe. This is the political theatre we see on the sports page and news. It is less than 1% of the total picture, but it captivates our attention while the cartel continues to make huge amounts of money and exploit the talents of young, poorly informed athletes. It is similar in design to the Federal Reserve. It is marketed to "protect the college sports". Protect it from what? All of that TV money? or protect colleges from actually having to pay for talent and adhere to a legitimate business model? Yo decide.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    At my university, the athletes are actually consistently quite a bit better in the classroom than the average student. Most of them get 3.4-3.6 GPA's that would be 3.7's if they didn't have to stretch themselves quite so thinly.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    At my university, we look at the scholarship that the athlete gets as an equal trade for the additional publicity (and booster fundraising that engenders).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by jimslag 11 years, 10 months ago
    One of the things I read in a comment has to do with the University could demand compensation from the athletes. In my eyes they already do. Football and Basketball brings Millions of dollars to the universities with good programs. If you look at Texas or UCLA or Ohio State or Michigan or Kansas ( I tried for different areas and sports), they bring in hundreds of millions of dollars. The schools get paid for bowl participation in football and for being in the NCAA basketball tournaments. The boosters pay another couple of millions and corporations pay to put their names on stadiums and other things. I think the universities should pay the athletes for all the money they bring into the university. However unions are another thing. I don't think the athletes want to get into paying dues and union elections or political pandering with money from those dues. If they do get paid then there is no need for scholarships for athletes, so there is a trade off.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Snezzy 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The athletes are not given an education, but instead are promised a piece of paper that'll say they have graduated.

    I can make pieces of paper, too. I'll print out one for one of my horses (and a fine athlete he is), "Dr. of Applied Equine Studies." One for myself, too, "Master of Fertilizer Scooping."

    My horses are Union horses, and go on strike if asked to do more than about four horse work without a break.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Baseball is the perfect counter-example. Baseball has the farm system. Football and basketball use colleges for their minor leagues.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Probably, but not from an injury per se perspective, but from an inability to derive future compensation due to injury. That is a valid concern, but it is also for other trades. It might be more reasonable to demand disability insurance.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 10 months ago
    Is "employment" a requirement? I believe that there are independent journeymen trades (plumbers, carpenters, electricians, etc.) that are members of unions but not necessarily "employees. Also, what about actors in the screen actors guild? Yes, they all receive some remuneration for performing their skills, but some are not in a specific identified relationship with a specific employer.

    That said, is the relationship between a student athlete and a college/university of a similar sort as that of an employer/employee? The athlete brings a specific skill set which benefits the university. The university provides something of value in return - a college education. From that relationship, it would seem that this is one similar to an employer/employee relationship.

    So, it would seem that a specific employer/employee relationship is not required to be part of a union, yet, even so, this relationship seems to hold.

    I think that the real question here is to what type of issues would union representation apply? I don't think that it should be on wages - the athletes do not receive wages. Their value received is an education. Can they expect to bargain over that education, and if so, in what capacity? How about playing conditions? I think these are going to be the critical issues. If somehow this gets to a wage payment situation I think that it will be the death knell for college sports.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Actually, yes, occaissionally there is a draft pick that comes directly from HS or from outside the college ranks (depends on sport - some have rules against it). Granted, it is rare, but it does occur. Generally, those athletes, if they have played in any professional capacity, are considered free agents, not "draftable" athletes.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 11 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    We have a minor league baseball team here in town, so it is possible without college. Josh Beckett (formerly of the Marlins and Red Sox) was probably the most famous to come through here.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 11 years, 10 months ago
    Ayn Rand said that labor unions might be the best hope for an institution that can bring laissez-faire capitalism. Much anti-union sentiment among conservatives is only traditionalism, not truly a capitalist theorem rooted in market reality. Remember that in _Atlas Shrugged_ Rearden Steel had a workers' union. Hank and the union steward were on the same side against the looters.

    This is a quantum leap forward. The primitive collectivist explanation has been that only Federal Reserve Notes are "money" so college athletes are "unpaid." Of course, they receive scholarships, special classes, and employment and career path counseling, mentoring, stewardship, and agency. Have you ever seen a professional sports "draft" pick who did not go to a college or university? If you watch professional American football or basketball, the announcers very often mention the school of the player on camera during the scrum or chequer or whatever they call it. In short, college sports is just a minor league for the NFL, NBA, and other professional careers. Face reality. A is A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Ben_C 11 years, 10 months ago
    No, they are not employees in the classic sense. They do receive "goods' for their services (scholarships, food, etc) and the possibility for a zillion dollar contract in the NFL. However, they are "temporary" not "permanet" employees. An arguement can be made that universities could demand compensation for providing the necessary job training for their next level of employment - perhpas a percentage of their contract. The NLRB is pretty much left wing antibusiness so their decision doesn't suprise me.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo