College Athlete Unions?

[Bubba]

Outside The Lines -- Northwestern Wildcats football players trying to join labor union - ESPN

Interesting. I'm not a big fan of unions, but there are some things they could accomplish. Guaranteeing a 4 year scholarship would be one. Unfortunately this would not apply to state universities so the Alabamas of CFB could continue to operate as they are... This would put private universities (like ND) at another disadvantage.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Maybe the lawyers out here can answer this question? Would a union of players effectively end their status as an amatuer athletes?

 

[ulukinatme]

Maybe the lawyers out here can answer this question? Would a union of players effectively end their status as an amatuer athletes?

Not a lawyer, but based on the article and memory there was a case in Colorado where a player tried to collect Workman's comp when he was injured and couldn't compete. His argument was that as a player he had similar responsibilities to paid university employees or something like that. I think that's when the NCAA came up with the term "student athlete" and had it adopted across college football, I'm going off memory though.

Personally I would like to see 4 year scholarships across the board, so if this kind of things leads to change, I'm all for it. I'm usually not a big fan of Unions either, but what they're asking for appears to be legit and makes sense. Four year scholarships, providing a fund for athletes to return to school to finish their degree, etc.

They made a good point here:

"It's become clear that relying on NCAA policymakers won't work, that they are never going to protect college athletes, and you can see that with their actions over the past decade," Huma said. "Look at their position on concussions. They say they have no legal obligation to protect players."

The NCAA certainly has been a failure the last several years. They're sole focus seems to be whatever is good for business and not what's necessarily good for the universities or the student athletes.

 

[irishff1014]

This is going to drive college football south in a hurry!

 

[T Town Tommy]

I agree on the four year scholarships. Don't know so much about the returning to school issue... depends on the reason for leaving I guess. I just think this would be used as a front to pay student athletes and that would end ametuer sports. The debate sure needs to be had however as, like you said, the NCAA and universities have been all about themselves when it comes to the issues of the day.

 

[ulukinatme]

This is going to drive college football south in a hurry!

Why do you say that? This isn't your typical Union. Paying athletes isn't on the table, at least that's not their current goal. So far they've stated that their aim is for 4 year guaranteed scholarships, possible funds put in a trust for athletes to return to school to finish their degree, and properly covering the cost of tuition and the extras it entails. I don't see a problem with these goals, unless the public schools never have to abide by it.

 

[irishff1014]

Why do you say that? This isn't your typical Union. Paying athletes isn't on the table, at least that's not their current goal. So far they've stated that their aim is for 4 year guaranteed scholarships, possible funds put in a trust for athletes to return to school to finish their degree, and properly covering the cost of tuition and the extras it entails. I don't see a problem with these goals, unless the public schools never have to abide by it.

That's how all unions start.

Just wait til they start making requirements. Such as how many hours a week players can practice, How many days in the week they can have no football activity. It is going to happen.

I am a fan of making sure these young men get their scholarships. It isn't fair to them that they got hurt and the schools take that away from them. For as much good as this might be it will bring bad.

 

[md_bennett]

I think the extra fund might be a little extreme. If their 4 year guaranteed scholarships were to guarantee their free return and automatic admission to graduate I would be fine with that. To to set aside funds for kids to come back after leaving early to hopefully be making a few million dollars though seems a bit crazy. They might not come back. They might decide to come back after a hugely successful NFL career. That money may sit there for years when it could be helping students with real issues that may have to leave school forever. Plus money put aside is money that can be misappropriated at some point in time (see Social Security Administration).

 

[ulukinatme]

I think the extra fund might be a little extreme. If their 4 year guaranteed scholarships were to guarantee their free return and automatic admission to graduate I would be fine with that. To to set aside funds for kids to come back after leaving early to hopefully be making a few million dollars though seems a bit crazy. They might not come back. They might decide to come back after a hugely successful NFL career. That money may sit there for years when it could be helping students with real issues that may have to leave school forever. Plus money put aside is money that can be misappropriated at some point in time.

I think you could use the money for other means than leaving for the Pro's and returning. If a player leaves school to take care of family for awhile, but isn't in position to participate in sports when they return...that might fall under those guidelines. It could also help fund those athletes that are medically unable to participate and want to finish the degree.

 

[irishog77]

I think you could use the money for other means than leaving for the Pro's and returning. If a player leaves school to take care of family for awhile, but isn't in position to participate in sports when they return...that might fall under those guidelines. It could also help fund those athletes that are medically unable to participate and want to finish the degree.

Agreed. If a kid has to take a leave of absence, for lack of a better term, then let him do it. Most schools allow non-athletes to do this; although keeping the original scholarship may or may not be (probably depends on the individual institution and reason for leaving).

Leaving school early to attempt to play professionally (and retaining your scholarship) should definitely not be allowed. It would be like a kid on an academic scholarship quitting school early to go work somewhere...then decide, "Well, I didn't like how that turned out. I'm going back to school now. For free." I mean if an individual institution wanted to decide to do that, then that would be their choice. But mandating it through a union isn't good.

I think pretty much all reasonable people agree that full cost and 4 year schollies should be granted to student athletes. Why can't the ncaa just do that? A union doesn't need to be formed to accomplish that.

 

[ulukinatme]

I think pretty much all reasonable people agree that full cost and 4 year schollies should be granted to student athletes. Why can't the ncaa just do that? A union doesn't need to be formed to accomplish that.

A union shouldn't need to be formed to accomplish it, but why hasn't the NCAA done it yet? $$$ I guess.

 

[nsideirish]

Per a Northwestern football player on Reddit (and I think he makes some excellent points):

NU player here on a throwaway. This isn't about getting paid. What it is about is protection. Many of us will have numerous injuries throughout our playing careers. A group of those players will continue to feel the effects of those injuries long after their playing days are over. The goal is to have some sort of medical protection if we need surgeries stemming from injuries sustained while playing for our university. Another goal is graduate school for those who were fortunate enough to play as a true Freshman. Most student-athletes get redshirted in their first year, and receive one year of grad school payed for in their fifth year of eligibility. We feel as though it is fair to ask for the same investment from the university all around. It isn't about getting an extra $200 a month for spending. We have our stipend, and if we budget correctly we are able to make it stretch for the month. Would it be nice to have some part of jersey sales or memorabilia sales? Absolutely. But that is not the goal as of right now.
Just wanted to add in that I am extremely thankful for the opportunity I have been given to not only play football, but to attend a world class university such as Northwestern. It is an opportunity millions dream of having. We are treated well at Northwestern, but unfortunately that is not the case at many other schools. Hopefully we can create a voice for the players and clean up these issues.

 

[ulukinatme]

Per a Northwestern football player on Reddit (and I think he makes some excellent points):

Hey, Acamp, if that buddy of yours starts going off about college athletes not attending class and all of them being illiterate, you could point him toward this reply from the Northwestern player. Cro-Magnons can't present arguments like this without pictures.

 

[irishog77]

A union shouldn't need to be formed to accomplish it, but why hasn't the NCAA done it yet? $$$ I guess.

True. I guess like many other things in life-- why do it if you aren't compelled to do it.

I'll go ahead and admit I'm about as anti-union as people get, but something needs to be done about college football. I'm fine with full cost and a 4 year scholarship. I think there's at least some movement towards granting this. But I'm fairly skeptical the ncaa will actually enact it until forced to do so. The formation of a union would help spur it along.

But then we'd be stuck with another union. As irishff stated above, I believe it would snowball from there. The term "union" is basically viewed as a bad word in the South. And I know many others throughout the country aren't fans of unions either. Hell, I honestly don't know many liberals anymore that support unions (I'm scratching my head trying to think of liberal friends of mine that do).

I understand where these kids are coming from. The irony in their belief, though, is that forming a union would, in time, decrease the support and financial support fans give to their sport. If people stop watching, attending, and caring about college football, then the amount of money needed to support what they want drops. So, in essence, they could be killing off the thing they want anyway.

 

[wizards8507]

True. I guess like many other things in life-- why do it if you aren't compelled to do it.

I'll go ahead and admit I'm about as anti-union as people get, but something needs to be done about college football. I'm fine with full cost and a 4 year scholarship. I think there's at least some movement towards granting this. But I'm fairly skeptical the ncaa will actually enact it until forced to do so. The formation of a union would help spur it along.

But then we'd be stuck with another union. As irishff stated above, I believe it would snowball from there. The term "union" is basically viewed as a bad word in the South. And I know many others throughout the country aren't fans of unions either. Hell, I honestly don't know many liberals anymore that support unions (I'm scratching my head trying to think of liberal friends of mine that do).

I understand where these kids are coming from. The irony in their belief, though, is that forming a union would, in time, decrease the support and financial support fans give to their sport. If people stop watching, attending, and caring about college football, then the amount of money needed to support what they want drops. So, in essence, they could be killing off the thing they want anyway.

I take it you're a conservative / libertarian? You should reconsider what a "union" is at it's very nature. It's nothing more than individuals getting together and freely associating with one another. The problem comes from laws that specifically protect unions or force employers to recognize them. If you want to band together and fight for what you think is right, fine. Then I, as the business owner, have the right to fire you all. Unions are effective in a skilled environment (think electrical, plumbing, auto to some extent) because the business owner can't afford to fire the people whose skills are highly specialized. When I was at ND, there was a big push for the dining hall workers to unionize. This is absolutely absurd, because it's generally low-skill work. If you unionize and strike, you're easily replaced.

The libertarian party platform sums it up pretty well:

We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.

 

[AvesEvo]

That's how all unions start.

Just wait til they start making requirements. Such as how many hours a week players can practice, How many days in the week they can have no football activity. It is going to happen.

I am a fan of making sure these young men get their scholarships. It isn't fair to them that they got hurt and the schools take that away from them. For as much good as this might be it will bring bad.

Isn't this already the case with the NCAA?

 

[Ndaccountant]

True. I guess like many other things in life-- why do it if you aren't compelled to do it.

I'll go ahead and admit I'm about as anti-union as people get, but something needs to be done about college football. I'm fine with full cost and a 4 year scholarship. I think there's at least some movement towards granting this. But I'm fairly skeptical the ncaa will actually enact it until forced to do so. The formation of a union would help spur it along.

But then we'd be stuck with another union. As irishff stated above, I believe it would snowball from there. The term "union" is basically viewed as a bad word in the South. And I know many others throughout the country aren't fans of unions either. Hell, I honestly don't know many liberals anymore that support unions (I'm scratching my head trying to think of liberal friends of mine that do).

I understand where these kids are coming from. The irony in their belief, though, is that forming a union would, in time, decrease the support and financial support fans give to their sport. If people stop watching, attending, and caring about college football, then the amount of money needed to support what they want drops. So, in essence, they could be killing off the thing they want anyway.

Just to help me understand your point more, what isn't working in your opinion?

 

[Irish YJ]

The large conferences in the NCAA are nothing more than businesses disguised as educational institutions for the most part. Either take the mask off, embrace the business and pay your players the market value, or stop selling out to networks, shoe manufactures, etc. and get back to amateur student athletics. I'm OK with either, just tired of the smoke and mirrors.

 

[irishog77]

Just to help me understand your point more, what isn't working in your opinion?

I think the full cost of attendance should be allowed. Does that mean a cost-of-living "stipend?" Maybe, maybe not. There's ways to fudge the numbers (housing allowance to live off campus vs. living in campus housing. We know, in time, that will be exploited. Same with a food allowance).

I think the athletes need to be allowed to work more or earn more in the summer/breaks/offseason and/or be allowed more discretionary money. Other students on full rides are allowed to earn uncapped money from outside jobs. Of course boosters can't be allowed to give no-show jobs, etc., but some system where they can legitimately work or where student-athletes can earn a stipend to spend on cell phone, going out, beer, dates, etc. needs to happen.

And I think 4 year scholarships should be a done deal.

That's really it, as far as I'm concerned. I don't think some earth-shattering stuff needs to happen to right the ship.

 

[irishog77]

I take it you're a conservative / libertarian? You should reconsider what a "union" is at it's very nature. It's nothing more than individuals getting together and freely associating with one another. The problem comes from laws that specifically protect unions or force employers to recognize them. If you want to band together and fight for what you think is right, fine. Then I, as the business owner, have the right to fire you all. Unions are effective in a skilled environment (think electrical, plumbing, auto to some extent) because the business owner can't afford to fire the people whose skills are highly specialized. When I was at ND, there was a big push for the dining hall workers to unionize. This is absolutely absurd, because it's generally low-skill work. If you unionize and strike, you're easily replaced.

The libertarian party platform sums it up pretty well:

I'm aware of what unions are and the place they've held in the history of the Western world.

 

[wizards8507]

I'm aware of what unions are and the place they've held in the history of the Western world.

I never said you didn't. I was questioning your blanket position that "all conservatives hate unions."

 

[irishroo]

The large conferences in the NCAA are nothing more than businesses disguised as educational institutions for the most part. Either take the mask off, embrace the business and pay your players the market value, or stop selling out to networks, shoe manufactures, etc. and get back to amateur student athletics. I'm OK with either, just tired of the smoke and mirrors.

On the surface that sounds good but how the hell do you pay each player market value without completely destroying any semblance of parity in college football? Market value for a Notre Dame or Texas or Alabama player is 10 times the market value of a player at Eastern Illinois or Kent State. If you actually pay each team it's market value, what's to stop not only every single top recruit from going to one of the 5 or 6 schools that pay the highest, but also the kids who do become stars at non-traditional powers (RG3 is a perfect example) from making a name for themselves at a Baylor or a Boise State and then transferring to Michigan or USC to cash in? Taken a step further, the market value of Texas A&Ms third-string center is basically nothing in excess of his scholarship, while the market value of Johnny Manziel is in the millions. Is A&M gonna pay JFF 10, 15, 20X what they pay his teammates? Doesn't seem realistic at all to me.

 

[PANDFAN]

sorry if already posted...not following just saw response

sorry if already posted...not following just saw response

NCAA Responds To Union Proposal
Donald Remy
NCAA Chief Legal Officer

This union-backed attempt to turn student-athletes into employees undermines the purpose of college: an education. Student-athletes are not employees, and their participation in college sports is voluntary. We stand for all student-athletes, not just those the unions want to professionalize.

Many student athletes are provided scholarships and many other benefits for their participation. There is no employment relationship between the NCAA, its affiliated institutions or student-athletes.

Student-athletes are not employees within any definition of the National Labor Relations Act or the Fair Labor Standards Act. We are confident the National Labor Relations Board will find in our favor, as there is no right to organize student-athletes.

 

[irishog77]

I never said you didn't. I was questioning your blanket position that "all conservatives hate unions."

That's not my position. Nor did I state that.

My position is that I don't like unions, in 2014.

My position is also that unions played a role in the U.S. emerging as one of the few true world powers after WWI, then, eventually, as the sole world power post WWII and Cold War.

I also alluded to the fact that a union forming today may help usher in needed changes and reforms to the ncaa.

Do I need to go on about how I believe that in 2nd world countries (Mexico, for example), I could see unions benefitting their economy? What are you getting at here?????

 

[Ndaccountant]

I think the full cost of attendance should be allowed. Does that mean a cost-of-living "stipend?" Maybe, maybe not. There's ways to fudge the numbers (housing allowance to live off campus vs. living in campus housing. We know, in time, that will be exploited. Same with a food allowance).

I think the athletes need to be allowed to work more or earn more in the summer/breaks/offseason and/or be allowed more discretionary money. Other students on full rides are allowed to earn uncapped money from outside jobs. Of course boosters can't be allowed to give no-show jobs, etc., but some system where they can legitimately work or where student-athletes can earn a stipend to spend on cell phone, going out, beer, dates, etc. needs to happen.

And I think 4 year scholarships should be a done deal.

That's really it, as far as I'm concerned. I don't think some earth-shattering stuff needs to happen to right the ship.

Thanks. Appreciate it.

 

[Ndaccountant]

NCAA Responds To Union Proposal
Donald Remy
NCAA Chief Legal Officer

This union-backed attempt to turn student-athletes into employees undermines the purpose of college: an education. Student-athletes are not employees, and their participation in college sports is voluntary. We stand for all student-athletes, not just those the unions want to professionalize.

Many student athletes are provided scholarships and many other benefits for their participation. There is no employment relationship between the NCAA, its affiliated institutions or student-athletes.

Student-athletes are not employees within any definition of the National Labor Relations Act or the Fair Labor Standards Act. We are confident the National Labor Relations Board will find in our favor, as there is no right to organize student-athletes.

I would love to know what the fair market value is for the 3rd string TE at Northwestern. Sadly, I man never know.

 

[PANDFAN]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Northwestern responds to its players leading labor movement: <a href="http://t.co/nZ0i4y5KSD">pic.twitter.com/nZ0i4y5KSD</a></p>— SB Nation CFB (@SBNationCFB) <a href="https://twitter.com/SBNationCFB/statuses/428247334221148160">January 28, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[sfk324]

The NCAA already allows for multi-year scholarships. If athletes want to force schools to provide them, they need to start going to the schools that award them instead of the ones who don't. Schools in the former: ND, Fresno State, Illinois. Schools in the latter: Texas, Texas A&M. Alabama and Auburn provide them but on a very limited basis. You can believe that if Texas starts losing top-caliber recruits to schools like Fresno and Illinois, they will rethink that policy real quick. The fallacy that you need to go to Alabama or Texas or a like school over Fresno of Illinois to get to the NFL is demonstrably false. If you want to be treated fairly, on the other hand, a strong case can be made for not going to UT or 'Bama.

 

[irishroo]

There is a simple, easy solution that would solve nearly every major flaw in the current college football system: the NFL removing it's "3 years out of HS" requirement.

 

[wizards8507]

There is a simple, easy solution that would solve nearly every major flaw in the current college football system: the NFL removing it's "3 years out of HS" requirement.

This. This so hard.

The product might suffer a little bit but college football would be all RKGs. Let the NFL be their own player factory.