Northwestern Players file to join labor union

[tcf15]

I posted this in the Conference Realignment thread, but it may be more applicable here:

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...cats-football-players-trying-join-labor-union

Ramogi Huma, president of the National College Players Association, filed a petition in Chicago on behalf of football players at Northwestern University, submitting the form at the regional office of the National Labor Relations Board.

Backed by the United Steelworkers union, Huma also filed union cards signed by an undisclosed number of Northwestern players with the NLRB -- the federal statutory body that recognizes groups that seek collective bargaining rights.

"This is about finally giving college athletes a seat at the table," said Huma, a former UCLA linebacker, who created the NCPA as an advocacy group in 2001. "Athletes deserve an equal voice when it comes to their physical, academic and financial protections."​

NU player on Reddit:

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. ​

 

[Exit 4]

Ahh, here's a quick way to accelerate the likely wind down of DII and DIII football; require schools to provide long term medical care for sports injuries.

What ever happened to buyer beware? Don't want to get injured, then don't play....its why I never played, that and being too slow.

 

[mrhandyman]

Will they have to pay union dues?
Will their scholarships now become taxable income?
Can they go on strike if they don't get enough playing time, carries, etc?

 

[upstater]

I like the end of the article that compares student athletes to grad assistants. Heck, they should be compared to work-study kids too.

Make them employees.

The difficult part is to then figure out compensation. If they are employees, how are they compensated?

There's the rub right there. Is scholarship a form of compensation? Room and board? You can't compare a grad student stipend to a player's stipend. Two different things since the grad student doesn't receive room & board and the grad student pays for fees and books.

The players have somehow involved themselves in a losing argument, and all because of one reason--as I've said repeatedly: they aren't looking closely enough at the budgets.

 

[ZooCougar]

Thanks. Monitoring.

 

[upstater]

Will they have to pay union dues?
Will their scholarships now become taxable income?
Can they go on strike if they don't get enough playing time, carries, etc?

All excellent questions--for now no union dues. But if you're an employee, then yes the stipend/room&board can be considered taxable income. I don't think that's true of the scholarship.

If the people pushing this ever win, it would mean one of two things:

1. Colleges go to a semi-pro system outside the university (sports would fall under the marketing wing of a university, the student affiliation would end).

2. Or, The end of D1.

 

[ZooCougar]

I like the end of the article that compares student athletes to grad assistants. Heck, they should be compared to work-study kids too.

Make them employees.

The difficult part is to then figure out compensation. If they are employees, how are they compensated?

There's the rub right there. Is scholarship a form of compensation? Room and board? You can't compare a grad student stipend to a player's stipend. Two different things since the grad student doesn't receive room & board and the grad student pays for fees and books.

The players have somehow involved themselves in a losing argument, and all because of one reason--as I've said repeatedly: they aren't looking closely enough at the budgets.

I agree completely. Student Athletes should be treated like they are on a work study. This is why I am totally for the stipend.

 

[upstater]

I agree completely. Student Athletes should be treated like they are on a work study. This is why I am totally for the stipend.

That's again a can of worms. Work-study is a federal program.

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/fws/index.html

Those kids are first forced to take out Direct Loans after filling out a FAFSA before they're eligible for work-study.

One way or another, you're going to fall into problems. If these athletes are treated like other student employees (grads and work-study) they may have to bear the burdens that such "employees" face, which is taxes and loans.

 

[metsfan2323]

This may put the brakes on the idea of paying players. The problem the P5 face is that if you give an inch the players may want a mile. Make student athletes feel like "employees" and they may want to join a union. Unions lead to demands and the threat of strikes and the rapidly declining popularity of the sport.

Do the P5 really want to open up Pandora's box?

 

[metsfan2323]

If the people pushing this ever win, it would mean one of two things:

1. Colleges go to a semi-pro system outside the university (sports would fall under the marketing wing of a university, the student affiliation would end).

2. Or, The end of D1.

I think your #1 is also the end of D1. That scenario certainly wouldn't feel like college sports anymore.

I think this will lead to colleges pushing the NBA and NFL to form minor leagues so kids can go that route if they chose. Give the players a choice and then tell them to STFU and not expect to be paid if they go the college route. No player has ever been forced to participate in college athletics. If Baseball can afford an extensive minor league system so can the other sports.

Top D1 athletes do get paid BTW, they get paid with fame. Fame leads to opportunities for financial rewards after college. Johnny Manziel has probably already made a small fortune off of his fame, i'm sure he and his agent have already signed endorsement deals. (No college football, no endorsement deals for Johnny). Even lesser athletes can capitalize on fame, Tyler Olander will never have a hard time finding a job in CT, even Tor Watts will probably find his limited fame beneficial to him down the road.

 

[upstater]

I think your #1 is also the end of D1. That scenario certainly wouldn't feel like college sports anymore.

You'd be surprised. I think the SEC and B12 would still go at it, a few teams from the ACC, a couple B1G teams, though the Pac12 would be done for.

Florida St., Clemson, Miami and maybe UNC. Ohio St. and probably Michigan. Wisconsin? I think schools like Penn State and Illinois would probably throw in the towel.

 

[Husky25]

All excellent questions--for now no union dues. But if you're an employee, then yes the stipend/room&board can be considered taxable income. I don't think that's true of the scholarship.

If the people pushing this ever win, it would mean one of two things:

1. Colleges go to a semi-pro system outside the university (sports would fall under the marketing wing of a university, the student affiliation would end).

2. Or, The end of D1.

Probably both.

The NCAA puts a limit on the weekly hours an athlete can be required to interact in team activities (20 hours per week in season, I believe). If "College" teams divorce themselves from the NCAA Member university, and go the semi-pro route, those limits are subject to relaxation and eventual extinction over time, leaving less time for the "student"-athlete to be a student. As that erosion advances, so does the TV money. College sports still hold a certain innocence. Professional feeder systems do not. So as a league leans semi-pro, less people (outside of hotbeds) will be inclined to tune in. At that point the FSUs of the would will start to have a problem with their own conference members (WF, BC, etc.) because they are not pulling their weight. No viewers = no advertising dollars. No advertising dollars = no huge TV payouts. Why? For the same reason the NBDL, WLAF (later the World League), AAA baseball, AHL, and UFL, don't have lucrative contracts, if at all.

 

[Sportsman5]

I agree with the people who say that a small stipend does make sense in a lot of ways, but I also agree with the people that say it opens a can of worms. A union of employees making a small stipend will eventually want a bigger stipend. It will keep growing.

However, what happens when TV advertising starts to decline? Any sane person knows that very few people actually watch ads. Between flipping between multiple games, bathroom breaks/ getting food, and most important of all use of laptops, tablets, and smartphones only a tiny fraction of people are actually paying attention to ads even compared to just 7 or 8 years ago. There are other ad platforms that actually reach audiences where they spend time (social media, games, etc) Companies are starting to shift and you will eventually see a huge and fast shift away from spending on TV. When this happens ad dollars from TV will plummet. Some would argue tank. Like ad dollars will be 10-20% of what they are now. I think that paying athletes would open a can of worms and would get even more controversial when ad revenues from TV start tanking. There may be creative ways to shift revenue streams to other platforms, but will that make up for all of the lost TV dollars? probably not. And if that's the case it will change things a lot. The model should stay exactly the way it is until we see how things shake out over the next 5-10 years.

 

[upstater]

I agree with the people who say that a small stipend does make sense in a lot of ways, but I also agree with the people that say it opens a can of worms. A union of employees making a small stipend will eventually want a bigger stipend. It will keep growing.

However, what happens when TV advertising starts to decline? Any sane person knows that very few people actually watch ads. Between flipping between multiple games, bathroom breaks/ getting food, and most important of all use of laptops, tablets, and smartphones only a tiny fraction of people are actually paying attention to ads even compared to just 7 or 8 years ago. There are other ad platforms that actually reach audiences where they spend time (social media, games, etc) Companies are starting to shift and you will eventually see a huge and fast shift away from spending on TV. When this happens ad dollars from TV will plummet. Some would argue tank. Like ad dollars will be 10-20% of what they are now. I think that paying athletes would open a can of worms and would get even more controversial when ad revenues from TV start tanking. There may be creative ways to shift revenue streams to other platforms, but will that make up for all of the lost TV dollars? probably not. And if that's the case it will change things a lot. The model should stay exactly the way it is until we see how things shake out over the next 5-10 years.

One thing people really don't understand about all these dynamics is that the decisions are being made by people who are not at all invested in the long term health of college sports.

The decisions are being made by presidents (who just want this problem off their plates so that they can run a university) and athletic directors (who get a good salary for simply being competitive and not embarrassing the academic side). These are non-profit institutions, and I'm only emphasizing that because as much as it may seem as though all these people are invested in college athletics, they are not -- at the end of the day -- responsible for the eventual outcome in case it all goes belly up. They are not like the NFL, with billions of assets at stake. Or any other pro sports league. If this all collapses, you'll have ADs out a $400k salary. The Presidents will be largely unaffected. In other words, there is no real stake in college sports by the people running them. And that will have repercussions when it comes to longterm planning.

 

[Sportsman5]

I definitely agree with you upstater. Even if everyone is aware of trends and roughly what the future will look like in 10 years (which the vast majority of people are not, even in positions of power such as AD and president), than many don't care much about athletics or are short sighted about it. I think more presidents of universities would like to follow the ivy league and downgrade athletics or get rid of them all together . It definitely can give a university a negative image academically. North Carolina would be a glaring point. UConn is clearly suffering too. If you look at the reputation polls that U.S. news and world report gathers (which play a major factor in their ranking), than you will see that UConn does not have as good of an academic reputation according to high school councelors and academic peers as some schools that are blatantly below uconn. I think the academic troubles of the basketball team and other incidents from the BB team have contributed to this incorrect reputation of the University on a national level.
We will see where things go. I like college athletics how they currently are, but there will be some sort of change. The question is will it completely upend the current system or just slightly tweak it. All signs point towards huge change occurring in steps over the next 10-20 years. If you are a big fan of the current system, than it will likely be for the worse.

 

[Colt house75]

I posted this in the Conference Realignment thread, but it may be more applicable here:

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...cats-football-players-trying-join-labor-union

Ramogi Huma, president of the National College Players Association, filed a petition in Chicago on behalf of football players at Northwestern University, submitting the form at the regional office of the National Labor Relations Board.

Backed by the United Steelworkers union, Huma also filed union cards signed by an undisclosed number of Northwestern players with the NLRB -- the federal statutory body that recognizes groups that seek collective bargaining rights.

"This is about finally giving college athletes a seat at the table," said Huma, a former UCLA linebacker, who created the NCPA as an advocacy group in 2001. "Athletes deserve an equal voice when it comes to their physical, academic and financial protections."​

NU player on Reddit:

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. ​

Can you see collective bargaining because "they" don't like the treatment they are receiving for some of the following:2 or 3 a days in the summer or the coaching they are receiving, or the times of practice, playing times, meals, ...don't like any of the above-.....in reality- then go do something else.
Go work for a living and payoff your student loans that would be required; or better yet, actually earn an "ACADEMIC" scholarship....

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

If college sports were a free market, many college athletes would be getting paid a whole heck of a lot more than their free education. And given the anti-competitive nature of the NFL/NBA (what other profession refuses to hire you at 18?), it should be interesting to see how this shakes out.

It's pretty funny how many free market capitalists I know who suddenly start screaming, "Oh, these coddled students! A free education isn't good enough?!" when students want to get paid what they're actually worth to the Universities they generate millions of dollars for.

 

[metsfan2323]

(what other profession refuses to hire you at 18?),\

almost all of them.

 

[metsfan2323]

they're actually worth to the Universities they generate millions of dollars for.

Many schools can claim a financial loss on athletics. Has the UCONN football team generated enough free cash flow to pay for the Rent?

 

[ZooCougar]

If college sports were a free market, many college athletes would be getting paid a whole heck of a lot more than their free education. And given the anti-competitive nature of the NFL/NBA (what other profession refuses to hire you at 18?), it should be interesting to see how this shakes out.

It's pretty funny how many free market capitalists I know who suddenly start screaming, "Oh, these coddled students! A free education isn't good enough?!" when students want to get paid what they're actually worth to the Universities they generate millions of dollars for.

The student athletes would quickly find that the market couldn't support the cost. There would be less "jobs".

 

[upstater]

If college sports were a free market, many college athletes would be getting paid a whole heck of a lot more than their free education. And given the anti-competitive nature of the NFL/NBA (what other profession refuses to hire you at 18?), it should be interesting to see how this shakes out.

It's pretty funny how many free market capitalists I know who suddenly start screaming, "Oh, these coddled students! A free education isn't good enough?!" when students want to get paid what they're actually worth to the Universities they generate millions of dollars for.

1. Minor league sports do not make much money. The interest generated in college hoops, for example, is largely because of the university itself.

2. Colleges lose money on sports.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

If college sports were a free market, many college athletes would be getting paid a whole heck of a lot more than their free education. And given the anti-competitive nature of the NFL/NBA (what other profession refuses to hire you at 18?), it should be interesting to see how this shakes out.

It's pretty funny how many free market capitalists I know who suddenly start screaming, "Oh, these coddled students! A free education isn't good enough?!" when students want to get paid what they're actually worth to the Universities they generate millions of dollars for.

There would be about 20 schools who could afford to pay players. And the player's "salary" would be less than the market value of the college education.

 

[FAIRTIDES]

I definitely agree with you upstater. Even if everyone is aware of trends and roughly what the future will look like in 10 years (which the vast majority of people are not, even in positions of power such as AD and president), than many don't care much about athletics or are short sighted about it. I think more presidents of universities would like to follow the ivy league and downgrade athletics or get rid of them all together . It definitely can give a university a negative image academically. North Carolina would be a glaring point. UConn is clearly suffering too. If you look at the reputation polls that U.S. news and world report gathers (which play a major factor in their ranking), than you will see that UConn does not have as good of an academic reputation according to high school councelors and academic peers as some schools that are blatantly below uconn. I think the academic troubles of the basketball team and other incidents from the BB team have contributed to this incorrect reputation of the University on a national level.
We will see where things go. I like college athletics how they currently are, but there will be some sort of change. The question is will it completely upend the current system or just slightly tweak it. All signs point towards huge change occurring in steps over the next 10-20 years. If you are a big fan of the current system, than it will likely be for the worse.

If the passage above (in red) reflects reality, it is 100% the fault of UCONN's management; specifically the Managers responsible for keeping counselors informed about UCONN. If fleeting, resolved BB issues are being allowed to taint the continuing reputation of a top-20 Public Research University, everyone involved in creating the "perception of UCONN" should be marched down range from a firing squad. Thankfully, recent statistics having to do with incoming Freshmen would indicate that counselors, somewhere, see UCONN's value. Sorry, but UCONN's seeming inability or unwillingness to sell itself is maddening. Why hide such a great product.----- {RANT FINISHED.}

 

[Nostical]

More than the threat of unionization is the threat of employee status. That's what scares Universities most. The Workers Comp premiums and payments alone would be a killer.

 

[J187Money]

More than the threat of unionization is the threat of employee status. That's what scares Universities most. The Workers Comp premiums and payments alone would be a killer.

And it would be all sports. Not just football.