Northwestern Football players file petition to join labor union

[BC1978]

Upstater, I am not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with anything you stated above. My limited point is that if this is successful, a formal collective bargaining /contract process has been introduced. That in itself has the potential to significantly alter current relationships in ways - some obvious, some subtle - that people might not initially focus on. One small example that comes immediately to mind - the grievance process. What happens when a player violates team rules? Once can easily foresee this going though some sort of grievance process - typical for collective bargaining agreements. Maybe the results will be the same, but the process could be very different then today.

Now, don't get me wrong, I understand your point that the universities will likely have the upper hand. If "labor" has a dispute with "management", they can strike, of course. However, all that could mean hypothetically is that their scholarships are suspended and the "employees" have to pull out out of school (or pay tuition out of pocket) pending resolution of the dispute. IMO, this is unlikely; so I take your point. Again, my limited point, is that the basic relationship between athletes and their coaches, universities, and fellow students would, IMO be fundamentally altered.

 

[Nostical]

The employee question is largely irrelevant

Not really. One benefit of being an"employee" is you are entitled to Workers Comp. That would be a huge budget drain. Consider what BU would have been on the hook for when Travis Roy hit the wall in that hockey game. Every injury "in the course and scope of employment" would be compensable. Insurance costs would skyrocket. They cannot allow players to be designated as employees and will fight it all the way to oblivion.

 

[upstater]

Not really. One benefit of being an"employee" is you are entitled to Workers Comp. That would be a huge budget drain. Consider what BU would have been on the hook for when Travis Roy hit the wall in that hockey game. Every injury "in the course and scope of employment" would be compensable. Insurance costs would skyrocket. They cannot allow players to be designated as employees and will fight it all the way to oblivion.

Don't they already have insurance? I'm guessing they do. I wonder how they handle worker's comp questions for states in which you don't have to subscribe. In such states, nothing changes because the schools already have insurance. Then there's the question of seasonal or casual workers, athletes might fall into this category.

 

[billybud]

State law governs the definition of "employee" for terms of certain labor law like Workers Compensation.

Unemployment Compensation is a federal-state program whereby state implementing law must conform to federal law.

The definition of "employee" is a facet of state law for state operated programs like WC and UC. The law is very specific about the character of employee-employer relationships and the requirements for the relationship to be defined as an independent contractor. The state laws are based on the factors of the common law test used by IRS.

 

[upstater]

State law governs the definition of "employee" for terms of certain labor law like Workers Compensation.

Unemployment Compensation is a federal-state program whereby state implementing law must conform to federal law.

The definition of "employee" is a facet of state law for state operated programs like WC and UC. The law is very specific about the character of employee-employer relationships and the requirements for the relationship to be defined as an independent contractor. The state laws are based on the factors of the common law test used by IRS.

Yes, state law governs workers comp--but this is also new territory in a variety of ways. Whether the stipend is income or not is not only a question that the federal government will answer for itself, as well as state governments, but locally I've seen situations in which a school district taxed stipends when the federal and state government did not.

 

[huskypantz]

Not really. One benefit of being an"employee" is you are entitled to Workers Comp. That would be a huge budget drain. Consider what BU would have been on the hook for when Travis Roy hit the wall in that hockey game. Every injury "in the course and scope of employment" would be compensable. Insurance costs would skyrocket. They cannot allow players to be designated as employees and will fight it all the way to oblivion.

Hold on a second, if that's the case are pro sports paying workmans comp?

 

[Husky25]

Hold on a second, if that's the case are pro sports paying workmans comp?

A quick internet search reveals in California only.

 

[kingdobbs]

Hold on a second, if that's the case are pro sports paying workmans comp?

Yes, and no.

Yes, in the sense that by paying corporate taxes in their state, the teams are funding the general pool of workers compensation claims, however the state manages it.

Also generally speaking, yes, pro athletes are eligible to receive worker's comp from injuries resulting in play, and their players do make successfully compensated claims.

No, not every claim is successful. Due to the variance in state laws, some players may not be able to claim for anything but a specific career ending injury. This is not something that's unique to sportsmen and sportswomen, though.

 

[Husky25]

Yes, and no.

Yes, in the sense that by paying corporate taxes in their state, the teams are funding the general pool of workers compensation claims, however the state manages it.

Also generally speaking, yes, pro athletes are eligible to receive worker's comp from injuries resulting in play, and their players do make successfully compensated claims.

No, not every claim is successful. Due to the variance in state laws, some players may not be able to claim for anything but a specific career ending injury. This is not something that's unique to sportsmen and sportswomen, though.

Many states make exceptions for athletes based on the CBAs between the Leagues and Players' Unions. This is a couple years old, but its pertinent.

 

[billybud]

Yes, and no.

Yes, in the sense that by paying corporate taxes in their state, the teams are funding the general pool of workers compensation claims, however the state manages it.

Also generally speaking, yes, pro athletes are eligible to receive worker's comp from injuries resulting in play, and their players do make successfully compensated claims.

No, not every claim is successful. Due to the variance in state laws, some players may not be able to claim for anything but a specific career ending injury. This is not something that's unique to sportsmen and sportswomen, though.

Huh?

Workers comp, at least in Florida, has no involvement with corporate taxes.

It is provided as insurance by private insurance providers. Unemployment Compensation, in every state, is collected as an employer payroll tax.

 

[upstater]

Huh?

Workers comp, at least in Florida, has no involvement with corporate taxes.

It is provided as insurance by private insurance providers. Unemployment Compensation, in every state, is collected as an employer payroll tax.

Every state I've lived in has private employers paying the state worker's comp.

 

[Nostical]

Yes, state law governs workers comp--but this is also new territory in a variety of ways. Whether the stipend is income or not is not only a question that the federal government will answer for itself, as well as state governments, but locally I've seen situations in which a school district taxed stipends when the federal and state government did not.

"One reason that the NCAA created what can be considered the fictitious concept of the student-athlete was to help that organization avoid workers’ compensation liability for harm that football players experience during games. One argument against imposing that liability has been that colleges and universities are not in the football "business”, in apparent disregard of the huge outlays and revenues directly related to many high-profile university sports programs."

There are a lot of pandora's boxes that may need to stay shut if collegiate athletics as we know it can survive.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

If College Athletics doesn't want to be treated like big business, it shouldn't act like big business. I can guarantee the rationales behind realignment will be used against the colleges in a trial to show that the colleges view themselves as businesses, and therefore the athletes should be treated as employees.

 

[WestHartHusk]

If College Athletics doesn't want to be treated like big business, it shouldn't act like big business. I can guarantee the rationales behind realignment will be used against the colleges in a trial to show that the colleges view themselves as businesses, and therefore the athletes should be treated as employees.

Agreed, and it may very well be too late for college athletics to undue their actions. I can't wait to hear from Slive/Delaney/Swofford when athletic departments lose their not-for-profit status and have a union to deal with. I hope all the schools in the "P5" are investing their money wisely, which we know they aren't.

 

[metsfan2323]

If College Athletics doesn't want to be treated like big business, it shouldn't act like big business. I can guarantee the rationales behind realignment will be used against the colleges in a trial to show that the colleges view themselves as businesses, and therefore the athletes should be treated as employees.

Totally agree. The greed of these schools and conferences has brought this on. The NCAA champion next year will play 15 games (and we know it is going to 16) for the first time. The NCAA year round work schedule more and more resembles the NFL. These schools have gone this direction because the demand is there for the sport, but as demand drives expansion it is simultaneously driving exploitation. The more I think about this, maybe the union is justified and overdue. As fans of the sport we want to see more and more (i do too), but at what cost?

At the very least we (I) shouldn't be so quick to judge the kids at Northwestern, they may be justifiably assuming that the "P" in P5 stands for professional.