OT: NLRB Rules NU Football Can Unionize, College Sports Will Change Forever

[LegalEagle15]

Couple things. First this is just a ruling from the regional office of the NLRB, it doesn't have national scope yet. As of now the ruling only applies to scholarship football players at Northwestern. Second the IRA couldn't touch academic scholarships because they are still protected by the qualified exemption. I can't see those ever being touched. Third this ruling would only apply to private school athletes. Fourth the ruling doesn't quite give the IRS rationale yet because this is getting appealed and the ruling will be stayed pending appeal (meaning it has no legal effect until after the appeals process).  To be fair I'm a few beers deep right now watching tourney games so if my response is wrong blame it on Milwaukee Brat House.

[Tugg Speedman]

Couple things. First this is just a ruling from the regional office of the NLRB, it doesn't have national scope yet. As of now the ruling only applies to scholarship football players at Northwestern. Second the IRA couldn't touch academic scholarships because they are still protected by the qualified exemption. I can't see those ever being touched. Third this ruling would only apply to private school athletes. Fourth the ruling doesn't quite give the IRS rationale yet because this is getting appealed and the ruling will be stayed pending appeal (meaning it has no legal effect until after the appeals process).  To be fair I'm a few beers deep right now watching tourney games so if my response is wrong blame it on Milwaukee Brat House.

See the highlighted words above.  I think we are headed in this direction.

Also hearing that ND players are being asked to consider joining the union.  Since they are also part of the Chicago region of the NLRB, the ruling would immediately apply to them and they could just do it.

CAPA thinks it could have 50 schools within a year after NU votes (assuming it does not get shot down).

[augoman]

I'm at a crossroads right now- deadline for renewing my Northwestern season football tickets.  I've been inclined to not renew due to unionization of players, but might want to to support the school.  Hard decision.

[Tugg Speedman]

I'm at a crossroads right now- deadline for renewing my Northwestern season football tickets.  I've been inclined to not renew due to unionization of players, but might want to to support the school.  Hard decision.

The NCAA is a broken clusterf**k.  The is really good news.  Their will never be a union.  Instead this will force the broken NCAA to fix itself.

Support NU

[ChicosBailBonds]

The NCAA is a broken clusterf**k.  The is really good news.  Their will never be a union.  Instead this will force the broken NCAA to fix itself.

Support NU

How are they going to "fix it"?  Remember what the NCAA is....an athletic ASSOCIATION with 1200+ schools, all with their own agendas, own goals, etc. 

[Tugg Speedman]

How are they going to "fix it"?  Remember what the NCAA is....an athletic ASSOCIATION with 1200+ schools, all with their own agendas, own goals, etc. 

They are going to rally around a common agenda, to change the by laws so that the players feel a union is unnecessary.

If the colleges feel their goal is to crush the union, and then smile that "we showed them," this will reemerge in other forms again and again.

Look I'm as anti-union as anyone, but I don't see this as a union movement.  I see this as a device to force change.  That's why I'm for it and think Kain Kotler is a hero.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

They are going to rally around a common agenda, to change the by laws so that the players feel a union is unnecessary.

If the colleges feel their goal is to crush the union, and then smile that "we showed them," this will reemerge in other forms again and again.

Look I'm as anti-union as anyone, but I don't see this as a union movement.  I see this as a device to force change.  That's why I'm for it and think Kain Kotler is a hero.

*Colter. I like it as well. Except im pro union. Looking at it though I dont think it become full out union but it is forcing change in the NCAA. Also helps that im a huge NU football fan.

[MUsoxfan]

Most schools can't afford to pay student athletes more than what they already do. Something like 30 schools are operating their athletic departments at a profit, with a number of schools conveniently (including Marquette) operating at cost. The rest subsidize their athletic programs. Granted there are a whole host of factors to why schools are losing money on athletics (ballooning coaching contracts, massive construction projects, etc., etc.) but toss in an extra 3k a semester for "cost of attendance" for a school with 500 student athletes...that's 1.5 million dollars the school is going to have to come up with. Per semester. If somebody comes up with a workable model for increasing the compensation to student athletes I don't see an issue with giving them more money. They do a lot for the university and bring in money, students, and donors. So far I've yet to see such a model. This is going to drag out for a long, long time.

Doesn't "creative accounting" play the biggest role in this? The same way the Chicago Blackhawks claim they run at a loss every year?

[LegalEagle15]

I actually don't think the ruling would apply to Notre Dame football players. At least I would argue against it in court because of this language in the ruling: "Eligible to vote are all football players receiving football grant-in-aid scholarship and not having exhausted their playing eligibility employed by the Employer located at 1501 Central Street, Evanston, Illinois" - that specifically names football players at Northwestern and nobody else. If it doesn't apply to other athletes at the university then it likely won't apply to other school's athletes - yet. As far as the institutions and their revenues there is likely some creative accounting going on - but the fact is most schools aren't raking in the massive amounts of profit that many people say they do. If you'd like a look at each schools financial information here's a great link: http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/

[augoman]

WSJ has interesting articles on this today- including current make-up of NLRB and big push by United Steelworkers union.  While not specifically 'anti-union', I am opposed to union invasion of amateur sports, and find unions in modern times to be self-seeking and anti-rights.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Experts said that NU football players "could one day have to pay federal and state taxes on athletic scholarships" following Wednesday's ruling, but it is "too soon to make them worry." Michigan State law professor Amy McCormick said, "It’s unlikely anything would happen immediately." She said that scholarships under the IRS code are "exempt from being taxed unless they are compensation for services required as condition for receiving the aid." However, she noted that the IRS "has not considered athletic scholarships as income" (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 3/28). O'Connor Davies Exempt Organization Tax & Advisory Services Group Partner Garrett Higgins said, "The fact that the players were not considered employees in the past is essentially the reason why their scholarship or parts of it weren't taxed before. The IRS may be able to make the argument that the scholarship is really payment for services, and therefore compensation, and is now taxable to the athlete." ESPN.com's Darren Rovell noted if NU players "did form a union and they were taxed, it's not clear exactly what they would be paying tax on." If, for example, their entire scholarship was "deemed taxable, the athletes would be paying at least $15,000 in federal tax alone on the $61,000-a-year scholarship." One major conference AD "speculated that the value the players received from the training table, travel and even coaching could be taxed" (ESPN.com, 3/27).

[ChicosBailBonds]

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR: In Atlanta, Jeff Schultz writes forming a union is actually "not something the athletes should want to pursue." If they are "recognized as employees and form a union, that will lead to collective bargaining." Schultz: "Would athletes from Alabama and Cal Poly Pomona go to the bargaining table with the same objectives? Employees get paid. Employees also can get fired. On the spot. ... Employees get taxed. Are you ready for that, Mr. Wildcat?" (ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, 3/28). In Buffalo, Bucky Gleason writes the minute athletes "accept a penny from a college for athletics, the rules change." Gleason: "You march to their orders. You study when they tell you to study. You eat what they want you to eat. You train the way they want you to train. In exchange, they give you an education. If that works for you, fine, but understand the deal before making the commitment. ... So, kids, be careful what you wish for" (BUFFALO NEWS, 3/28). But ESPN's J.A. Adande said unionizing is a "logical step" in college athletics. Adande: "For everyone saying this is the downfall of college athletics, they haven't asked for money yet. They're just looking for some basic protections" ("Around The Horn," ESPN, 3/27).

END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT? In Miami, Greg Cote wrote there are "problems with the ruling" and asked, "Is it really good for college sports to have players negotiating how much they'd like to practice?" Mostly the ruling "is wrong because it assumes players contribute substantially to a school's football revenue," which is "a faulty premise." The ruling "alludes to the 'enormous commercial value' of players' work," but "that's wrong." Players "come and go, and very few actually impact a university's success or brand" (MIAMIHERALD.com, 3/27). In Detroit, Daniel Howes writes there are "all sorts of reasons the NLRB’s call here is a bad one, the chief being this: a system derided for making big money off college kids would morph into a system that uses college kids to make a little less money for universities as it opens a new revenue stream for the sagging dues rolls of organized labor" (DETROIT NEWS, 3/28). Weinberg, Wheeler, Hudgins, Gunn & Dial Partner Steve Mooney said, "This ruling’s probably the worst thing that could have happened to the NCAA in a long time. Not just because of the decision, but it really has stirred up a hornet’s nest" (ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, 3/28).

YOUR MOVE, NCAA:  In New Jersey, Tara Sullivan writes the NCAA "has no choice now but to listen" and if it fails to, "major college sports as we know it will never be the same." This "isn’t a simple equation of paying college players to play; it’s about finally recognizing how much more they give than they get." The NCAA "can no longer play dumb, no longer stay silent and hope these issues go away while their own coffers spill over" (Bergen RECORD, 3/28). A N.Y. TIMES editorial states the college-sports establishment has "brought this trouble on itself by not moving to address players’ legitimate grievances." The College Athletes Players Association "isn’t seeking a specific share of football revenue or even salaries, but better medical protections for concussions and other injuries, guaranteed scholarships that cover the full cost of attending college and the establishment of a trust fund that players can use to finish their schooling after their NCAA eligibility expires." Those are "modest, reasonable goals," and if universities "don’t want to have to deal with unions, they should stop fighting their players and work with them to improve conditions" (N.Y. TIMES, 3/28). In Baton Rouge, Scott Rabalais writes even if the NU case "isn’t exactly the model for future change, change is coming" in the form of "stipends, collective bargaining, perhaps eventually even more boycotts." Rabalais: "Could we even see a picket line of players around a major college football stadium or basketball arena?" (Baton Rouge ADVOCATE, 3/28).