What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

College Football Team Seeks to Form a Labor Union (1 Viewer)

ShaHBucks

Footballguy
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/northwestern-football-team-takes-first-step-in-forming-college-players-union-163217754.html

Northwestern football team takes first step in forming college players union - Yahoo Sports

As Kain Colter prepared for his third season as Northwestern's starting quarterback last summer, he took a class at the Evanston, Ill., school called "Modern Workplace."

In it, he studied unions across history, including the current ones involved in professional sports. That's when the instructor noted, according to Colter, "I can't believe that student-athletes do not have a players union."

The line hit Colter hard. College sports were a part of the Denver native's life. Here he was at exclusive Northwestern, about to become a two-time team captain in the Big Ten while developing into an NFL prospect. Yet, he long ago came to believe the NCAA's rules of amateurism were "unjust." There was something wrong, he thought, with players making billions of dollars for colleges and universities, yet having little to no say on how their sports were run and how the players were protected let alone having any input as to where all the money went.

In a violent, dangerous and very profitable business, the players had no voice, either individual or collective. That core conflict is what has caused labor unions to form across history in all sorts of industries.

On Tuesday, Colter took a big and potentially historic step toward possibly changing the system. His grassroots organizational work resulted in the start of a college players union.

Paperwork signed by what union organizers say represents the majority of the current Wildcats football team was submitted Tuesday to the Chicago office of the National Labor Relations Board. Cards filled out by individual players declared they wished to be represented by the newly formed College Athletes Players Association (CAPA) against what they deem their employer, Northwestern University.

CAPA is backed by the United Steelworkers, who had their international president, Leo Gerard, and national political director, Tim Waters, in Chicago to assist in the process. It is running in conjunction with the National College Players Association, a once small advocacy outfit from California operated for years by former UCLA linebacker Ramogi Huma.

.

Kain Colter said he was inspired by a class he took that studied the role of unions. (USA Today)

Colter found out about the NCPA when researching for the "Modern Workplace" class. He contacted Huma, and the two began a conversation. It turned out to be a perfect match.

This is just the first step, and it comes with a long road ahead and no guarantee of success.

Yet the act is significant, and the latest in a rush of challenges both legal and political to the basic concept of amateurism that is the bedrock of the NCAA. Before anyone brushes off the possibility of a college athlete's union as farcical and farfetched, there was a time when professional sports owners said the same thing about the likelihood of organized labor in their leagues.

"The No. 1 thing that I want to accomplish is to finally give athletes a true voice," Colter told Yahoo Sports. "They need to finally have a seat at the table when rules and regulations are determined. They need an entity in place that can negotiate on the players' behalf and have their best interests in mind."

Tuesday's development does not automatically create a players union in college sports or even guarantee that one will eventually form. CAPA is looking to represent only football and men's basketball players initially, according to Huma although further expansion is possible.

Registering with the labor relation board starts a process. Northwestern must respond to whether it wishes to recognize the union. The school likely will follow NCAA precedent and deny the players are employees at all. Colleges prefer to classify them as "student-athletes."

School administrators and coaches, according to Colter, were unaware of the union organizing as of Tuesday morning, when he planned to tell them personally. As such, neither the school nor the NCAA was initially available for comment.

If Northwestern rejects the union, the local labor board will hold a hearing on the matter, listen to both sides and make a determination on who is correct. In rough terms, the debate is over whether the players really are "student-athletes" or whether they're employees compensated by scholarships, room, board and other items.

No matter who wins, one side can appeal to the National Labor Relations Board. And no matter who wins that time, the loser can take the ruling to the Federal Courts, which has numerous layers and appeals processes.

.

Northwestern players submitted paperwork in hope of being represented by the College Athletes Players Association.

Even if the union at Northwestern ends up getting recognized, it would apply to athletes at only private NCAA institutions eligible for membership. Players at public schools would still have to take the case to their individual state boards.

So don't look for the union label anytime soon. This will be a war of attrition.

Huma is well aware of that, and isn't jumping into this fray on a whim. He wants to win. A Bruins linebacker in the mid-1990s, Huma became disillusioned with the NCAA when he saw players' monthly food allotment money routinely run out, only to have All-American teammate Donnie Edwards get suspended for accepting free groceries he needed.

He founded the NCPA to argue for the players and eventually found an ally in the gritty Steelworkers. This represents the group's boldest move yet. The United Steelworkers (USW) will provide CAPA with a legal team well versed in labor law that is experienced and has plenty of financial support for the fight ahead.

Huma notes that the NCAA's business model relies on the fact it can set the rules for compensation, support, medical resources as well as the amount of practice and games. It's a one-way street, a take-it-or-leave-it deal.

While professional sports unions generally rise to fan consciousness only during strikes or lockouts that often center on money, there are myriad other less divisive and important issues they can handle.

.

Former UCLA linebacker Ramogi Huma is the president of the National College Players Association.

The NFL Players Association, for example, was able to collectively bargain a limit on the amount of full-contact practices players must go through on a weekly basis and argue for specifics on off-season workouts. College football players, however, have no such ability to even ask for such a concession. Out of fear of angering coaches, they rarely speak up individually.

"We're trying to give college athletes a seat at the table," Huma told Yahoo Sports. "All rules are imposed on them by the NCAA. And every dollar the NCAA is able to deny the players goes to their salaries."

Said Colter: "Money is far from priority No. 1 on our list of goals. The health of the players is No. 1. Right now the NCAA does not require or guarantee that any university or institution covers any sports-related medical expenses. Student-athletes should never have to worry about if their sports-related medical bills are taken care of."

Colter finished his career at Northwestern after throwing for more than 5,000 yards and accounting for 50 touchdowns. He's now preparing for the NFL draft after returning from the Senior Bowl, and is trying to complete his studies in Evanston.

Being the front man on this push will bring backlash, and the issues are no longer his issues, but Colter said he couldn't leave college football quietly. Someone had to do something, he figured. It was long past time.

"This issue is a lot bigger than any individual," Colter said. "This has the potential to help our peers and future generations to come. We have the opportunity to leave collegiate sports better off than when we found it. People will not always agree with our actions, but deep down I know it is the right thing to do."

Time, money, resolve and the federal courts will eventually determine whether college athletes will gain organized representation.

It's possible, however, that a development that could potentially change so much about college sports was sparked when a star quarterback sat in a summer class, learning from his teacher. It's just the kind of scene the NCAA might use to film one of its public-relations commercials.
 
So let me see if I have this right:

Northwestern finally gets a decent football program going .... whereupon the team threatens to go on strike.

 
They definitely deserve medical care as they get older. It's kind of repulsive that a guy can get a concussion in 2014 and 20 years later have setbacks because of it...and the school does nothing.

Maybe the power conferences can pay them a salary or stipend but that's never going to trickle down. Schools like Temple or FIU would just fold the program before they paid players. They don't have the money for it.

 
NCAA has been saying for decades they are "paying" the players with education.

People (employees) have the right to organize and to bargain as a group.

 
And the fact that college athletes are being exploited. At least with a union they will have a voice in the matter.

 
Feds saying Northwestern players can form a union.

So will they get paid as much as Auburn players currently do?

Northwestern says they will drop FBS football if this goes through. :popcorn:

 
In a potentially game-changing moment for college athletics, the Chicago district of the National Labor Relations Board ruled on Wednesday that Northwestern football players qualify as employees and can unionize.

NLRB regional director Peter Sung Ohr cited the players' time commitment to their sport and that their scholarships were tied directly to their performance as reasons for granting them union rights.

Ohr wrote in his ruling that Wildcats players "fall squarely within the [National Labor Relations] Act's broad definition of 'employee' when one considers the common law definition of 'employee.'"

Ohr ruled that Northwestern players can hold an election on whether they want to be represented by the College Athletes Players Association, which brought the case to the NLRB along with former Wildcats quarterback Kain Colter and the United Steelworkers Union.

Northwestern issued a statement shortly after the ruling saying it would appeal to the full NLRB in Washington.

"While we respect the NLRB process and the regional director's opinion, we disagree with it," the statement read. "Northwestern believes strongly that our student-athletes are not employees, but students. Unionization and collective bargaining are not the appropriate methods to address the concerns raised by student-athletes."

CAPA supporters, meanwhile, celebrated the news. Colter tweeted: "This is a HUGE win for ALL college athletes!"
 
Does this board still have the invalidated appointees or was that fixed?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
In a potentially game-changing moment for college athletics, the Chicago district of the National Labor Relations Board ruled on Wednesday that Northwestern football players qualify as employees and can unionize.

NLRB regional director Peter Sung Ohr cited the players' time commitment to their sport and that their scholarships were tied directly to their performance as reasons for granting them union rights.

Ohr wrote in his ruling that Wildcats players "fall squarely within the [National Labor Relations] Act's broad definition of 'employee' when one considers the common law definition of 'employee.'"

Ohr ruled that Northwestern players can hold an election on whether they want to be represented by the College Athletes Players Association, which brought the case to the NLRB along with former Wildcats quarterback Kain Colter and the United Steelworkers Union.

Northwestern issued a statement shortly after the ruling saying it would appeal to the full NLRB in Washington.

"While we respect the NLRB process and the regional director's opinion, we disagree with it," the statement read. "Northwestern believes strongly that our student-athletes are not employees, but students. Unionization and collective bargaining are not the appropriate methods to address the concerns raised by student-athletes."

CAPA supporters, meanwhile, celebrated the news. Colter tweeted: "This is a HUGE win for ALL college athletes!"
:popcorn:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SI: How does this ruling affect public vs. private universities?

MM: Technically this decision only affects Northwestern. But now theres precedent that these players and their argument empowers them to enter into collective bargaining as a unit. Student-athletes at other private universities could rely on this as precedent, and in all likelihood the NLRB would affirm them, as well. But theyd still have to take the formal step of seeking recognition. If students at those schools wanted to unionize their football players, they could rely on this ruling.

However, this ruling does not empower players as public universities. Football players at Alabama could not use this at precedent. Theyre going to have to rely on state labor law, and we know 24 states are right-to-work states that either prohibit or greatly limit opportunities of state employees, like those at public universities, to collectively bargain. Now, if players at Northwestern are paid, thats a pretty big recruiting advantage over a player at the university of Alabama that wont be able to be in a union.

 
So does this now mean that football players are eligible to collect at least minimum wage for their time spent on football? Seems that with these long practice schedules, overnight trips, etc...this could actually get pricey.

If they're NOT eligible, then why? This opens up so many holes...

 
So does this now mean that football players are eligible to collect at least minimum wage for their time spent on football? Seems that with these long practice schedules, overnight trips, etc...this could actually get pricey.

If they're NOT eligible, then why? This opens up so many holes...
I don't believe it means anything yet. This process has a long way to go.

It's hard to imagine colleges negotiating contracts with players. How would recruiting work? Would individual colleges be able to set up their own unions and just outpay for student athletes? There really is an infinite number of possibilities.

 
So does this now mean that football players are eligible to collect at least minimum wage for their time spent on football? Seems that with these long practice schedules, overnight trips, etc...this could actually get pricey.

If they're NOT eligible, then why? This opens up so many holes...
I don't believe it means anything yet. This process has a long way to go.

It's hard to imagine colleges negotiating contracts with players. How would recruiting work? Would individual colleges be able to set up their own unions and just outpay for student athletes? There really is an infinite number of possibilities.
I get that this isn't final...just trying to think forward. It's just interesting to start thinking of the kinds of issues this could open up.

I'm not against pay-for-play, but it needs to be heavily regulated to not cause major waves in the sport. I can't see a beneficial system with differential pay. i.e. Johnny Manziel should make the same as the 2nd string punter for Central Michigan. I think if it's going to happen, EVERY athlete in a particular sport should make the same, regardless of who they are, what school they attend, or how good they are.

 
So does this now mean that football players are eligible to collect at least minimum wage for their time spent on football? Seems that with these long practice schedules, overnight trips, etc...this could actually get pricey.

If they're NOT eligible, then why? This opens up so many holes...
I don't believe it means anything yet. This process has a long way to go.

It's hard to imagine colleges negotiating contracts with players. How would recruiting work? Would individual colleges be able to set up their own unions and just outpay for student athletes? There really is an infinite number of possibilities.
I get that this isn't final...just trying to think forward. It's just interesting to start thinking of the kinds of issues this could open up.

I'm not against pay-for-play, but it needs to be heavily regulated to not cause major waves in the sport. I can't see a beneficial system with differential pay. i.e. Johnny Manziel should make the same as the 2nd string punter for Central Michigan. I think if it's going to happen, EVERY athlete in a particular sport should make the same, regardless of who they are, what school they attend, or how good they are.
A stipend system is fine if you also allow players to pursue outside money for their likeness. Without that, it makes absolutely no sense why Manziel and a backup punter should get the same money.

 
So does this now mean that football players are eligible to collect at least minimum wage for their time spent on football? Seems that with these long practice schedules, overnight trips, etc...this could actually get pricey.

If they're NOT eligible, then why? This opens up so many holes...
I don't believe it means anything yet. This process has a long way to go.

It's hard to imagine colleges negotiating contracts with players. How would recruiting work? Would individual colleges be able to set up their own unions and just outpay for student athletes? There really is an infinite number of possibilities.
I get that this isn't final...just trying to think forward. It's just interesting to start thinking of the kinds of issues this could open up.

I'm not against pay-for-play, but it needs to be heavily regulated to not cause major waves in the sport. I can't see a beneficial system with differential pay. i.e. Johnny Manziel should make the same as the 2nd string punter for Central Michigan. I think if it's going to happen, EVERY athlete in a particular sport should make the same, regardless of who they are, what school they attend, or how good they are.
A stipend system is fine if you also allow players to pursue outside money for their likeness. Without that, it makes absolutely no sense why Manziel and a backup punter should get the same money.
As soon as you introduce outside money and differential pay, you basically give unfair advantages in recruiting to the schools with the biggest boosters. You'll perennially have the same schools as national powerhouses. There's nothing to stop Phil Knight from telling a kid he'll sign him to a huge Nike contract if he goes to Oregon, essentially giving Oregon a huge advantage in recruiting over, say, Boise State. You'd ruin college football at that point.

 
So does this now mean that football players are eligible to collect at least minimum wage for their time spent on football? Seems that with these long practice schedules, overnight trips, etc...this could actually get pricey.

If they're NOT eligible, then why? This opens up so many holes...
I don't believe it means anything yet. This process has a long way to go.

It's hard to imagine colleges negotiating contracts with players. How would recruiting work? Would individual colleges be able to set up their own unions and just outpay for student athletes? There really is an infinite number of possibilities.
I get that this isn't final...just trying to think forward. It's just interesting to start thinking of the kinds of issues this could open up.

I'm not against pay-for-play, but it needs to be heavily regulated to not cause major waves in the sport. I can't see a beneficial system with differential pay. i.e. Johnny Manziel should make the same as the 2nd string punter for Central Michigan. I think if it's going to happen, EVERY athlete in a particular sport should make the same, regardless of who they are, what school they attend, or how good they are.
Unless that's collectively bargained for (which, in fairness is what's at stake here) what you're suggesting is illegal. That's price fixing.

 
How will Title IX impact this stuff if it moves forward? Will schools have to find female athletes to pay the same as their male athletes?

 
So does this now mean that football players are eligible to collect at least minimum wage for their time spent on football? Seems that with these long practice schedules, overnight trips, etc...this could actually get pricey.

If they're NOT eligible, then why? This opens up so many holes...
I don't believe it means anything yet. This process has a long way to go.

It's hard to imagine colleges negotiating contracts with players. How would recruiting work? Would individual colleges be able to set up their own unions and just outpay for student athletes? There really is an infinite number of possibilities.
I get that this isn't final...just trying to think forward. It's just interesting to start thinking of the kinds of issues this could open up.

I'm not against pay-for-play, but it needs to be heavily regulated to not cause major waves in the sport. I can't see a beneficial system with differential pay. i.e. Johnny Manziel should make the same as the 2nd string punter for Central Michigan. I think if it's going to happen, EVERY athlete in a particular sport should make the same, regardless of who they are, what school they attend, or how good they are.
A stipend system is fine if you also allow players to pursue outside money for their likeness. Without that, it makes absolutely no sense why Manziel and a backup punter should get the same money.
As soon as you introduce outside money and differential pay, you basically give unfair advantages in recruiting to the schools with the biggest boosters. You'll perennially have the same schools as national powerhouses. There's nothing to stop Phil Knight from telling a kid he'll sign him to a huge Nike contract if he goes to Oregon, essentially giving Oregon a huge advantage in recruiting over, say, Boise State. You'd ruin college football at that point.
I think recognizing the player's right to compensation is more important than the NCAA. College football wouldn't go anywhere.

 
Gigantic story here.

For decades, college athletes have played for free with no long-term healthcare. Meanwhile, their universities now net countless millions. So this lucrative revenue source will now be dented by student athletes demanding pay. Makes you wonder how this affects university budgets.

 
This is dumb and a bad idea.

That is all.
Why? Scared your Saturdays watching young men playing a game making universities rich will go away?
Oh, how do I count the ways.

I don't think it will ever go away, the great mawp of tv demands the games be played.

But I do believe that we have crossed a rubicon of some sorts here whereby everyone is designated some classification deserving of some level of entitlement.

They are students, not employees.

And if you say they are not students really then I ask, why doesn't someone just start a minor league and sign any player of any age who will want a paycheck. Now they would be employees.

 
Hey Mr. Student Athlete. You know that "free" education you were getting for playing a sport? I hope you have enough money to pay the income tax on that.

And colleges should be paying tax on the income they get from sports.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is just a matter of statutory interpretation. Frankly, the NCAA has an easy out if they're worried about being subject to the NLRA or the Sherman Act. They can just lobby Congress for a law that exempts them.

But its hard to argue that college athletes don't fit the statutory definition of an employee.

 
This is just a matter of statutory interpretation. Frankly, the NCAA has an easy out if they're worried about being subject to the NLRA or the Sherman Act. They can just lobby Congress for a law that exempts them.

But its hard to argue that college athletes don't fit the statutory definition of an employee.
Oh please, is there a more labor oriented labor board anywhere in the USA than NLRB in Chicago?

They would hand out labor rights on a silver platter to a passing bum who claimed he was an "employee" because he earned money through panhandling.

 
This is dumb and a bad idea.

That is all.
Why? Scared your Saturdays watching young men playing a game making universities rich will go away?
Oh, how do I count the ways.

I don't think it will ever go away, the great mawp of tv demands the games be played.

But I do believe that we have crossed a rubicon of some sorts here whereby everyone is designated some classification deserving of some level of entitlement.

They are students, not employees.

And if you say they are not students really then I ask, why doesn't someone just start a minor league and sign any player of any age who will want a paycheck. Now they would be employees.
Seems like they are athletes first and students second to me. The graduation rate of football and basketball players for most major universities is obscenely pathetic.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top