Northwestern football players to vote on union Friday

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

NVM

[LegalEagle15]

Thank you. Universities adapted to many factors that have created the system as it now exists. And Title IX dictates that you must have an equal number of scholarships by gender. Women's sports do not pay for themselves so they must be subsidized. Who pays for that?

Close. Actually you have to have a proportional amount of athletic opportunities based upon your schools enrollment, so both genders should have the same ratios of the athletes to the enrollment. If your school is 60/40 female, you should probably have an athletic department of 60/40 female to male sports. Courts actually found one school guilty of a Title IX violation when they were 3% off. Truthfully you are supposed to spend the same amount on both genders too, including facilities. Finally most athletic departments in the country get subsidized. Only about 30 run at a profit.

[ChicosBailBonds]

CBB:

If boosters/alumni/schools are willing to throw money at these kids, and if you fear the rules are being set up to allow it to happen legally, then it tells you a scholarship is not enough to "compensate" these recruits.  So why do insist on keeping those kids at an unfair advantage?  Change the rules to allow them to get their worth.  Again this will only be the case for a handful of recruits for the entire sport.

I think at the end of the day, little changes.  If you're a blue chip recruit, you go to Kentucky because Calipari has a proven track record of getting you ready and drafted high into the NBA.  Ditto Cocah K at Duke.

The arms race will be like it is now, between Duke and Kentucky boosters so what changes?  

Jabari Parker is not going to pick Northwestern because JB Pritzker (billionaire benefactor and NU Trustee) is willing to dump a ton of money in his lap.  Jabari will take the long view and understand Duke puts him in the best position for the next level, just like it is now.  

And speaking of billionaire benefactors ...  Phil Knight (Nike Founder) donates zillions to Oregon so they have the best facilities in the world to attract recruits and coaches.  Ditto Boone Pickens at OSU or, to a lesser but still significant extent, Dick Strong with MU.  Why is this moral but giving the kids a couple of bucks the Pandora's box from hell?

It won't corrupt the system, it is now.  The Pandora's box from hell is the current system (which is why I keep saying the NCAA is a broken clusterf**k now).  The changes and potential payment (again potential because no one is arguing for it now) will make things more moral and fair.  And MU will come out a winner in this process.  The M Club can compete with those other schools when it comes to paying recruits.

Donating to a SCHOOL where the buildings, assets, etc are there for a long period of time to be used for many generations of student athletes is quite different than what you are talking about. 

Where I struggle with your logic is the rules in place today were put in place BECAUSE of all the cheating going on in the past.  The rules didn't come out of nowhere, they came out as a result of rampant paying off of student athletes, etc...fake jobs, "meal money", etc.  It is also why the schools doing the most of it were winning the most.  Guess what, they clamped down, busted high profile programs, etc and what happened?  More parity set in.  Imagine that.  Of course it doesn't eliminate all cheating, of course the rule book is absurdly big, of course there are reforms and ways to trim things down, but most of it is there for common sense reasons and a reaction to the massive cheating going on at schools in the past.

[ChicosBailBonds]

It's relevant because if you start paying athletes in revenue generating sports and you have to make up that cost somewhere else, cutting non-revenue sports is going to be a way to do that. Then we run into Title IX issues.

No kidding, why these guys keep pretending that 800lb gorilla doesn't exist is astonishing.

[keefe]

Close. Actually you have to have a proportional amount of athletic opportunities based upon your schools enrollment, so both genders should have the same ratios of the athletes to the enrollment. If your school is 60/40 female, you should probably have an athletic department of 60/40 female to male sports. Courts actually found one school guilty of a Title IX violation when they were 3% off. Truthfully you are supposed to spend the same amount on both genders too, including facilities. Finally most athletic departments in the country get subsidized. Only about 30 run at a profit.

Risk/reward is not just about capital. Labor needs to understand that if the results are not there then they can and should be replaced as interchangeable parts.

The Marx I take most seriously is named Groucho. Not Karl.

[LegalEagle15]

If you truly believe this, then you would have to believe a bench player is worth less, a qb worth more, so on and so forth. 

Why do you think school teachers "deserve" to make about four times more?  Cuz it makes you feel good?  Should school teachers salaries be pegged to results...wouldn't that be interesting.  That's how much of the other world works (I say this as the son of a school teacher).

And since we are talking about worth, how much is the TOTAL VALUE of a college education, not just the tuition avoidance?  According to many studies, someone with a college degree earns nearly double a person without it.  Over the course of their life, it means earning power of about $2.4M over a 40 year career, vs $1.3M without a degree.  More than $1M.

Plus they didn't have to pay for the parchment.    They are getting what they are "worth", and then some.

Also worth considering is the value derived from an athlete's exposure and development thanks to the stage, facilities, and training a university provides. Free education, plus free training, plus free national media exposure, etc. I say free meaning they don't pay tuition and fees, obviously there is a physical investment on their part, but the return on investment for those things is pretty high.

[ChicosBailBonds]

This

You would never work for an organization that freely admitted they underpaid you so they have the funds to allow people in unprofitable divisions continue to earn a paycheck. 

If a school wants to have a gymnastics program, they need to decide it on its merits, just like they do a chemistry program.

LOL.  Actually, this does happen in corporate America.  You think the IT division is generating revenue for your company, or is it the sales division?  Yet you need both to do business.  You don't think there are R&D divisions at companies that may have 10 ideas and spend a bunch of money against them, but only 1 idea goes to market?  Look, there are unprofitable areas within corporations that are used for seeding purposes, etc.

But let's use the NCAA example, yes the one line item supports everything else.  Guess what Heisenburg, next time you go to a Marquette game, refuse to pay the whole ticket price for the ticket....because guess what, a chunk of that cost is not going to benefit men's basketball.  Refuse to pay your cable bill, because a chunk of that bill is going to Fox Sports 1 which in turn is flowing down to the Big East and to the schools, and all the programs benefit from it.

You can say they should all stand on their own merits, well let's go in that direction.  Those Olympic medal hauls you see every 4 years...gone.  Because you will basically destroy Olympic sports feeder programs throughout the country as a result.  The 450,000 student athletes out there, about 430,000...gone.  What a great idea.  What's next, UW-madison isn't going to make the NCAA tournament but MU is?

[ChicosBailBonds]

True. We could see schools that have men's football, men's basketball, and like 15 women's sports. All the non-revenue men's sports could have to be cut to save money.

Can't do that under the current rules.  Minimum of 14 squads, 7 men's and 7 women's, or you can go 6 men's and 8 women's.  If such a thing were to happen, you would probably just see those schools try to break away or they would lower the minimum sports requirements.

Nevertheless, for schools to save money, because their costs would go up, they have to cut elsewhere.  I read some stuff here (not from you TAMU) and I'm convinced more than ever that all MU students should be forced to take a business class or two.  Seriously.

[MUSF]

If you truly believe this, then you would have to believe a bench player is worth less, a qb worth more, so on and so forth. 

Why do you think school teachers "deserve" to make about four times more?  Cuz it makes you feel good?  Should school teachers salaries be pegged to results...wouldn't that be interesting.  That's how much of the other world works (I say this as the son of a school teacher).

Yes, a bench player is worth less than a starter, who is worth less than an all-american. I'm sure there are members of the UAW that are much better than others, but the union determines how they wish to address performance and pay in collective bargaining. If the players choose to unionize or organize in other ways, they will have to address this issue. How do the players' unions and owners handle this in pro sports? League minimums, salary caps, bonuses, etc.. I'm not saying that would, or should be the model for NCAA athletes, but it's not an unresolvable issue.

My point about teachers was about market value. Teachers, garbage men, firefighters, etc. deserve more if you consider the importance of the services they provide. However, it's not that hard to generate teachers, garbage men, and firefighters, and they don't generate millions to billions of dollars in revenue. Therefore they don't get paid what they "deserve", they get paid what they are worth.

[Spotcheck Billy]

And since we are talking about worth, how much is the TOTAL VALUE of a college education, not just the tuition avoidance?  According to many studies, someone with a college degree earns nearly double a person without it.  Over the course of their life, it means earning power of about $2.4M over a 40 year career, vs $1.3M without a degree.  More than $1M.

Plus they didn't have to pay for the parchment.    They are getting what they are "worth", and then some.

but as someone else posted, many of these players wouldn't go to college except as an avenue to a pro gig

IMO there no future earnings applicable in cases like that - if the player wasn't forced to go to a college to get to the pro ranks they never would go to college and instead would be working at the carwash etc.

[LegalEagle15]

The difference between this scenario and the organization underpaying people/cutting departments is that legally you can't just cut your women's and non revenue programs. While paying athletes doesn't directly implicate Title IX, the rippling effects of those costs will. You don't get to decide if you want to have a gymnastics program or not, you get to decide if you want to be in compliance with Title IX or not, then choose which sports would best help you be in compliance. So while they may not have a gymnastics program, something else will have to be there (generally women's crew).

[keefe]

This

You would never work for an organization that freely admitted they underpaid you so they have the funds to allow people in unprofitable divisions continue to earn a paycheck. 

If a school wants to have a gymnastics program, they need to decide it on its merits, just like they do a chemistry program.

I strongly urge you to think through the AMR SABRE Business Case. It's not just about Risk/Reward but also articulates the relationship between fixed and variable labor and skilled vs. unskilled. That one case study encapsulates all that is right with American capitalism as well as how regulatory interference upsets certain economic truths.

[ChicosBailBonds]

but as someone else posted, many of these players wouldn't go to college except as an avenue to a pro gig

IMO there no future earnings applicable in cases like that - if the player wasn't forced to go to a college to get to the pro ranks they never would go to college and instead would be working at the carwash etc.

Totally disagree....because how many went into college with that mentality (1000's of examples), but came out of it without any pro potential and actually utilized that degree.  Thus, tremendous value because it forced a kid to get a degree from which he benefited when he wouldn't have received one at all.

You can also argue the extra value they got if they do make the pros.  How much was Dwyane Wade's NCAA tournament performance worth in selecting him 5th in the draft?  Or his overall performance that year?  Marquette provided the stage for him to display those talents....worth millions.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Can't do that under the current rules.  Minimum of 14 squads, 7 men's and 7 women's, or you can go 6 men's and 8 women's.  If such a thing were to happen, you would probably just see those schools try to break away or they would lower the minimum sports requirements.

Nevertheless, for schools to save money, because their costs would go up, they have to cut elsewhere.  I read some stuff here (not from you TAMU) and I'm convinced more than ever that all MU students should be forced to take a business class or two.  Seriously.

Gotcha. I wasn't sure what the exact rules were. All I know is that if you are going to increase spending in men's sports, you have to equally increase it in women's sports. If there's a limit on how many men's non-revenue sports you can cut, I don't know how they are going to make up the increase of costs that unions will bring.

[MUSF]

I think people tend to overlook that the ruling by the regional director of the NLRB is going to be appealed and it will be heard by the full panel in D.C. Then if Northwestern officials still don't get the answer they're looking for, the case will end up in federal courts where it will likely be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court given the potential ramifications. Point being, there is still a LONG way to go before we can definitively say that college athletes are "employees" legally speaking.

I'm not holding my breath that the regional diretor's decision will make it through the appeals. That being said, it's kind of interesting that NU players are already voting on whether to unionize when the employee determination is far from settled.

Yes, there is a long way to go. That stated, the threat of unionization has already forced the NCAA to consider making concessions. They are obviously concerned about their position.

I don't think it's strange the NU players are voting on unionization at this point. Employee determination has been settled by the NLRB. Therefore the NU players can in fact form a union. As you stated, the NCAA still has appeal options, but there would be no need to appeal if the players didn't actually proceed with unionization. The vote by the NU players is the next logical step in the process.

[MUSF]

It's relevant because if you start paying athletes in revenue generating sports and you have to make up that cost somewhere else, cutting non-revenue sports is going to be a way to do that. Then we run into Title IX issues.

Would the NCAA have grounds to challenge Title IX if the employee determination by the NLRB is upheld?

[keefe]

Would the NCAA have grounds to challenge Title IX if the employee determination by the NLRB is upheld?

Law vs. policy

[LegalEagle15]

Would the NCAA have grounds to challenge Title IX if the employee determination by the NLRB is upheld?

Challenging it on what grounds? Trying to get it to not apply to revenue sports? Or that Title IX shouldn't apply to college athletics in general?

If you're the NCAA challenging Title IX would not be a good idea.

[MUSF]

Law vs. policy

Both can be challenged

[ChicosBailBonds]

Challenging it on what grounds? Trying to get it to not apply to revenue sports? Or that Title IX shouldn't apply to college athletics in general?

If you're the NCAA challenging Title IX would not be a good idea.

The Bush Administration tried to challenge Title IX and it went nowhere.  Title IX is here to stay.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Both can be challenged

Sure, you can challenge anything.  If you think the current group in D.C. is going to let TitleIX go away...LOL.  Even with a GOP admin, they ran into way too much opposition.  Challenge away, it isn't going away. 

[MUSF]

Challenging it on what grounds? Trying to get it to not apply to revenue sports? Or that Title IX shouldn't apply to college athletics in general?

If you're the NCAA challenging Title IX would not be a good idea.

Title IX was enacted to prevent discrimination from education programs, which included college athletics. It was not meant to apply to employment at a university. I think the NCAA could make a strong argument that Title IX no longer applies if athletes are now considered employees under the law. Title IX doesn't require universities to maintain an equal number of male and female coaches or male and female professors. Why should they be required to maintain an equal number of male and female scholarship athletes or sports if participating in those sports is now considered employment?

I understand this would be unpopular in many circles, but the decision of the NLRB changes the equation.

[MUSF]

The Bush Administration tried to challenge Title IX and it went nowhere.  Title IX is here to stay.

That was before the NLRB decided that athletes were actually employees. Title IX doesn't protect employees, it protects students.

[keefe]

Both can be challenged

Sure, anything can be challenged. Always remember the first dictum: assess who has the upper ground.

[Tugg Speedman]

Northwestern Players Complete Union Vote; NLRB Review Under Way
By Mason Levinson

April 25 (Bloomberg) -- Northwestern University’s football players voted today whether to form a labor union in an election with the potential to change college sports.
The vote came a month after a National Labor Relations Board regional director ruled Wildcat scholarship football players are employees and eligible to form a union. Yesterday, the NLRB granted the school’s request to review that ruling and said players’ ballots will be impounded until it decides.

At stake is the status quo of a business whose revenue includes more than $31 billion in guaranteed broadcast contracts involving the National Collegiate Athletic Association and the five most powerful conferences. College sports also provides a free education to thousands of athletes, most on teams that don’t make a profit.

“The typical football player, what they want is solidarity, not divisiveness,” said Paul Haagen, a professor of sports and contract law at the Duke University School of Law in Durham, North Carolina. “They have no option as to a non-divisive outcome. That’s got to make it hard.”

With 76 scholarship players at the Evanston, Illinois, school eligible to vote, it will take a simple majority for the union to succeed. The players weren’t compelled to vote.

A Northwestern player who voted said that he was 80 percent sure the team voted no to unionizing, and almost all of the players opted to vote, according to the Chicago Tribune. The player was granted anonymity by the newspaper for fear of repercussions, it said.

Player Leadership

The effort to form a union has been led by former UCLA football player Ramogi Huma, head of a group that advocates for the rights of college athletes, and former Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter, who in January said in a media conference call that “the system resembles a dictatorship where the NCAA mandates rules and regulations that players abide by without any input or negotiation.”

The group trying to unionize, known as the College Athletes Players Association, is seeking guaranteed coverage of sports-related medical expenses for current and former athletes, compensation for sponsorships, a trust fund to help former players finish their degrees and an increase in athletic scholarships.

“Today’s vote clearly demonstrates that amateurism is a myth and that college athletes are employees,” Huma said in a statement. “The NCAA cannot vacate this moment in history and its implications for the future.”

School Statement

Following the election, Alan Cubbage, the school’s vice president for university relations, said in a statement that Northwestern agrees that students should have a voice in discussing important national issues regarding college athletics.

“However, we believe that a collective bargaining process at Northwestern would not advance the discussion of these topics, in large part because most of the issues being raised by the union are outside the purview of Northwestern,” Cubbage said.

The election followed efforts from both sides to sway the players’ decisions.

“Northwestern University has put tremendous pressure on the team to vote against forming a union, but we remain hopeful that the majority of players will feel free to follow their beliefs and vote Yes,” Huma said yesterday in an e-mail.

Cubbage said that the school’s campaign was in line with NLRB procedures and rules.
Trevor Siemian, a Northwestern quarterback, said this month that he would vote against organizing, according to the Chicago Tribune, and coach Pat Fitzgerald also recommended to his players that they turn down the opportunity to unionize.

Trust Issues

“Understand that by voting to have a union, you would be transferring your trust from those you know -- me, your coaches and the administrators here -- to what you don’t know -- a third party who may or may not have the team’s best interests in mind,” Fitzgerald wrote to the players in an e-mail, according to the New York Times.

Henry Bienen, Northwestern’s president emeritus, said last month that if the school got into a collective bargaining situation with its players, “I would not take for granted that the Northwesterns of the world would continue to play Division I sports.”

School’s Campaign

The NLRB will not count the votes if, after the review, the initial ruling that the students are employees is overturned. If the vote is eventually revealed and the players opted not to form the union, it would be harmful to future efforts by other teams to unionize, according to Brian Paul, an employment relations partner at Michael Best and Friedrich LLP in Chicago.

“Once one domino falls it’s easier to do it for everybody else, but if the Northwestern players vote no, that is potentially just as damaging as the NLRB reversing the decision,” Paul said in a telephone interview.
The unionization effort, along with recent lawsuits seeking to increase college players’ rights, has the potential to upend the business of college sports. The 123 football programs in the NCAA’s Football Bowl Subdivision turned a $1.3 billion profit on $3.2 billion in revenue in the fiscal year ended June 2013, according to data schools submit to the U.S. Department of Education.

NLRB Review

In its appeal, Northwestern argued that Chicago NLRB Regional Director Peter Sung Ohr ignored key evidence and that the decision “improperly refused to apply the legal precedent established in the NLRB’s 2004 decision in Brown University, in which the NLRB held that the graduate assistants were primarily students, not employees,” the school said in a news release.

The atmosphere surrounding today’s election was “relatively uncommon” because there are substantial outside interests -- those not directly connected to Northwestern -- who might be affected by its outcome, said Haagen, the Duke law professor.

The choice players have was more ideological than practical, as their college eligibility soon will expire and most of them probably won’t be involved with unions in the next stage of their lives, Haagen said in a phone interview.

“The bulk of the Northwestern players are in a transitional period of their lives,” Haagen said. “There is the negotiating of that shift from one place to another, and that makes their position unusual.”