Northwestern Player Unionize?

[GP1]

Link

Interesting. One of the comments in the comments section makes a good point. Northwestern is a private school and unionization at a private entity is different than at a public institution. Most D1 schools are public.

I have a question for those who would oppose this. If unionization of college athletes is a stupid idea, why are they attempting to unionize at one of America's great academic institutions?

[zen]

Well, let me attempt to escalate this quickly by asking a question.

Why shouldn't students, athletes, or any group of people be able to organize at a public school too?

Perhaps this ground has been covered legally in the past, and it would be answered by judicial precedent (something I have no familiarity with) but I contend that if the right to assemble is directly addressed by the first amendment, and the right to organize and negotiate is inferred by the same, then why should government or public institutions be able to benefit from legislation that curtails these freedoms?

[GP1]

@zen, Good angle on the 1st Amendment.

I think the key to this case will be simple...Are the players performing work? If you look at what they do, it sure looks like work...They are required to show up on time to perform their tasks...They create a product (a football game)......People pay for the product (tickets, ads, etc.)...They have supervisors (coaches)....Here is the big one, Are they compensated for what they do?

Interesting...Are they compensated? Very interesting indeed. Those who are against paying college athletes say they are already compensated for what they do with a free scholarship. Those who are for them getting paid say, rightly so, the scholarship is easily absorbed into the schools budget and not of the value said to be in reality. So, in reality, those in favor don't believe the scholarship is enough and the players should be compensated. If those against it say they are receiving compensation, doesn't that make the players employees given everything they have to do to receive the money and since they are receiving compensation, they have the right to unionize as any American worker does? Unbeknownst to them, those who have argued for years against paying athletes have been making the case for them.

Either way, they have a right to organize.

[zen]

Agree.

The only people who may not have the right to organize are minors, criminals, and those whose organized efforts threaten people's rights or public safety (I say safety not public welfare, because that verbiage is an open door of interpretation), and even in those cases, all constitutional rights are not completely waived.

[skip-zip]

I wonder, from a legal standpoint, how this fits into the equation:

They AGREE...BEFOREHAND.... to play sports for a particular school in exchange for paid tuition, room, and meals.

[GP1]

I wonder, from a legal standpoint, how this fits into the equation:

They AGREE...BEFOREHAND.... to play sports for a particular school in exchange for paid tuition, room, and meals.

This is no different than going to work somewhere and later unionizing.

[GP1]

Marquette Law Review Article

Almost as boring as reading about average minutes played for basketball players, but it illustrates the point.

Basically, when the term "student-athlete" had legal precedent put around it, it was in the 1950s. Legal precedent is hard to overturn but not impossible. Especially if the court sees past rulings not serving a purpose in modern times. I would argue that the 1950s were before the NCAA members realized they could use television to back up the Brinks truck to their schools and rake in the cash. The players today really shouldn't have to live under the now outdated court rulings.

I have a solution. Work frequently involves creating a product. I argue that there is a product being created (a game) and paid for in terms of tickets, television, etc. It's simple, make it so the product is free. Make it free to attend games and put the games on PBS. If nobody wants to do that, then they have to admit the players are employees producing a revenue producing product. If it makes it hard to pay coaches and ADs, then they can go get jobs making millions of dollars somewhere else in another industry.

[Balsy]

Marquette Law Review Article

I have a solution. Work frequently involves creating a product. I argue that there is a product being created (a game) and paid for in terms of tickets, television, etc. It's simple, make it so the product is free. Make it free to attend games and put the games on PBS. If nobody wants to do that, then they have to admit the players are employees producing a revenue producing product. If it makes it hard to pay coaches and ADs, then they can go get jobs making millions of dollars somewhere else in another industry.

I like this idea a lot. I have never been a fan of the outrageous profits made by college athletics. Higher education should be about higher education, and I firmly believe that students should have full 100% free access to the home games played on their campus. Luckily I went to Akron where my tuition dollars already subsidized the program (maybe not a good thing?) so I could go for free. Higher education institutions should be about higher education, period. All else should be secondary.

[MaxZIP]

Northwestern is my BIG10 team of choice. I agree with the stated goals of the group and support the student athletes in accomplishing said goals. The problem lies with the puppet masters...aka big union and/or lobbyists. Somewhere in the shadows lurks an evil. Groups need a vehicle to gain a political advantage, money and/or power.

"A lot of people will think this is all about money; it's not," Colter told the Chicago Tribune on Tuesday morning. "We're asking for a seat at the table to get our voice heard."

Leaders of the NCPA and CAPA will hold a press conference Tuesday in downtown Chicago to discuss the petition and unionization efforts.

According to NCPAnow.org, the group has 11 specific goals.

1. Minimize college athletes' brain trauma risks.

2. Raise the scholarship amount.

3. Prevent players from being stuck paying sports-related medical expenses.

4. Increase graduation rates.

5. Protect educational opportunities for student-athletes in good standing.

6. Prohibit universities from using a permanent injury suffered during athletics as a reason to reduce/eliminate a scholarship.

7. Establish and enforce uniform safety guidelines in all sports to help prevent serious injuries and avoidable deaths.

8. Eliminate restrictions on legitimate employment and players ability to directly benefit from commercial opportunities.

9. Prohibit the punishment of college athletes that have not committed a violation.

10. Guarantee that college athletes are granted an athletic release from their university if they wish to transfer schools.

11. Allow college athletes of all sports the ability to transfer schools one time without punishment.

[MaxZIP]

I am a bit surprised to see NU Football valued at $154.5 million. We often see revenues reported by year. Wonder how unions would shift the college football balance sheets?

To put it in perspective, the Cincinnati Bengals were valued by Forbes at $871 million, $4 million less than Texas. The Detroit Lions, Buffalo Bills, Oakland Raiders and Atlanta Falcons are amongst the teams valued less than the Longhorns program.

Source Link_Fansided.com

[Balsy]

Northwestern is my BIG10 team of choice. I agree with the stated goals of the group and support the student athletes in accomplishing said goals. The problem lies with the puppet masters...aka big union and/or lobbyists. Somewhere in the shadows lurks an evil. Groups need a vehicle to gain a political advantage, money and/or power.

After reading their petition, I completely support them. However, I know that the devil is always somewhere lurking in the details.

[GP1]

I like this idea a lot. I have never been a fan of the outrageous profits made by college athletics.

I have no problem with schools making money off of the games. I have a huge problem with the money that has been created over the past 2-3 decades and the players aren't even allowed to get a small percent of it while there are offensive coordinators making over a $1 a year. Why do we have to live through the farce that since the name of the player is not put on the back of a jersey, they aren't actually making money off of the player. Put the name on the back and give the player a percent of the sales just like they do in the NFL. This is what I mean by players profiting off of their fame. They should not receive money directly from the schools, but should share in some of the revenue produced.

It's all of the silly tricks the ncaa goes through to try to hide what they are actually doing that is insulting. The members of the ncaa will have nobody to blame but themselves when the little world they created for themselves comes falling down.

[MaxZIP]

Players bargain in the NFL seeking high salary and bonus in exchange for exclusivity and commitment. There are rumblings in the NFL and NBA about not being free (PC version) and being screwed by the system. A greater financial commitment on behalf of the university would demand concessions from players most likely in the form of stronger commitments. I am all for unionizing the players and giving them more money for their time. I just hope that they are prepared to bargain and understand that the majority of college football players have little if any leverage.

[GP1]

If Northwestern wins this case and they are the only school with bargaining rights, it could make NW a huge attraction for a lot of players. You can make the NFL from NW just as easily as you can from tosu. Why not go to a school where you get more than a scholarship?

If this case could make NW a great program for a few years while other school caught up, wouldn't the school make much more money than they would have in terms of merchandising, etc. than they would have before?

This could be a win-win for both parties.

[MaxZIP]

If Northwestern wins this case and they are the only school with bargaining rights, it could make NW a huge attraction for a lot of players. You can make the NFL from NW just as easily as you can from tosu. Why not go to a school where you get more than a scholarship?

If this case could make NW a great program for a few years while other school caught up, wouldn't the school make much more money than they would have in terms of merchandising, etc. than they would have before?

This could be a win-win for both parties.

NU is one of a handful of schools capable of incubating a new idea like this. The ironic side of this is that NU players tend to lean more toward the traditional student athlete model than other BCS schools. Real progress is made in the middle in the vacuum left by extremists.

[Spin]

They shouldn't receive money directly from the schools, but should share in some of the revenue produced.

Great idea. THIS is how you work around Proposition Title IX and all paying athletes of non revenue producing sports.

And they're not employees.

[GP1]

Deadspin

Great article on why the ncaa should embrace the union. History shows it has been great for sports leagues.

The title of the article should be titled, "Student-Athletes Smarter Than The Average AD".

All the members of the ncaa have to do is admit there is a work relationship between the players and the coaches. Anyone with half a brain already knows it. They are just making it official. I'm sure the schools can dip into the Mt. Everest pile of cash schools are making on college football TV rights and make things right. The should dip in now before the lose a couple of games due to a strike and lose some real money at that point.

All a school like Clemson would have to do is cut their offensive coordinators salary in half and there would be $7,000 per each player on scholarship. The OC isn't earning the money anyhow. If they have $1.2 million to pay an OC, they have plenty of money to fund some programs for the players.

[GP1]

Link

Andrew Sullivan, in my opinion, is and has been the smartest blogger on the internet for quite some time now. He has some links here to the pros & cons of the debate. Good reading.

This union debate has actually made the debate over the nature of athlete-students interesting again. Really a smart move by the players at NWestern. There is a reason they got into school there.

[Dr Z]

[skip-zip]

I'm glad this topic came up again, because I was just thinking about how this fits into our recent "leveling the playing field" discussions.

So, if players share in the revenue from their schools, wouldn't that take a big chunk of the resources away from the "big" schools? The same resources that they use today to create so much separation from themselves and everyone else in D-1A?

Although, that also may also persuade even more great players to go to those select schools, since they have the biggest chunk of profits to distribute to their players. Unless, of course, the total revenue distributed to players would be spread across all of D-1A.

Just a thought.

[Dave in Green]

You can be assured that any changes the wealthy schools are pushing will not result in a narrowing of the gap between the haves and have-nots. Any changes designed to help narrow the gap will need to come from other powers.

[skip-zip]

You can be assured that any changes the wealthy schools are pushing will not result in a narrowing of the gap between the haves and have-nots. Any changes designed to help narrow the gap will need to come from other powers.

It's just a discussion. I'm trying to walk myself through this. Hear me out......

This would be unlike any other change. It wouldn't be controlled by a group of powerful schools, who are hell-bent on maintaining power. Unionization of players would be FORCED upon them by a collective group of players from EVERY school.

If it happens, and they are permitted to share in school's revenue, I'm just wondering what happens when the player (union member) from Texas feels that he is entitled to $10,000, based on their profits, and the player from Akron (member of the same union) is only going to get a portion of his own school's profits, which is nothing?

In this scenario, the players within the Union who are from the low-revenue-generating schools FAR OUTNUMBER those from the big revenue generators. So, wouldn't they push for the profits to be evenly distributed among all of the players in the union?

If that was the case, large chunks of money would be taken from the big schools, which eliminates some of their ability to buy championships. Therefore, creating more parity.

At the same time, it would also ensure that there is no additional recruiting advantage given to the largest schools, since a student/athlete would not be able to get a bigger payday by going to the largest school possible.

[Dave in Green]

Right, the wealthy schools are certainly not in favor of a player union because unions are a counterbalance to monolithic management power. The wealthy schools simply want to reimburse their players in a manner of their own choosing in order to lessen the perceived need for a union. A college player union could, indeed, make leveling the financial field one of its priorities.

[skip-zip]

The wealthy schools simply want to reimburse their players in a manner of their own choosing in order to lessen the perceived need for a union. A college player union could, indeed, make leveling the financial field one of its priorities.

Ah..So I AM on to something here.

Could this also explain why it was Northwestern who started this? A Big 10 (or 11, or 12 or 13) school who might be tired of getting squashed by the huge public institutions in their own conference?

And trust me. I am NOT a union guy at all. And I was never in favor of players being paid. But I might be able to get interested in any situation that might level the playing field.

[Balsy]

I AM a union guy, but I've never been in favor of players being paid. I always thought the idea was absurd. However, I think you're onto something there skip.

The greatest allies for the "group of five" is those who are the perrenial doormats within the power-five.