OT: Northwestern Players Win Bid to Unionize

[UConn9604]

Northwestern players win bid to unionize
Updated: March 26, 2014, 3:15 PM ET
ESPN.com news services

CHICAGO -- Northwestern Wildcats football players and the College Athletes Players Association on Wednesday won their petition through the National Labor Relations Board to form a union and bargain for benefits.

As a result, Northwestern players will hold a vote on whether to unionize, a decision that will clearly impact college football and college sports generally. Northwestern said in a statement that it will appeal the decision.

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

http://espn.go.com/college-football...rn-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize

 

[MattMang23]

Next step pay for play

 

[WallStreetHusky]

No, the next step is that the Northwesterns and Dukes and Vandys of the world, the high performing academic D1 football schools, are going to drop football and that creates the opening that we need! Northwestern already publicly stated if they lose this case that they will look to drop football, deemphasize sports and concentrate on their academic mission. And people are commenting more about UMASS leaving the MAC??? Who gives an ........

 

[UConn9604]

No, the next step is that the Northwesterns and Dukes and Vandys of the world, the high performing academic D1 football schools, are going to drop football and that creates the opening that we need! Northwestern already publicly stated if they lose this case that they will look to drop football, deemphasize sports and concentrate on their academic mission. And people are commenting more about UMASS leaving the MAC??? Who gives an ...

It wasn't just Northwestern that said it would deemphasize sports if players were to be paid:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20130318/big-ten-jim-delany-ncaa-obannon/

 

[WallStreetHusky]

First, as the article states, the B1G is not going to kill the golden goose, and second, that article is about the O'Bannon suit, which is different than this topic, even though both will end up paying the players if they lose. I dont believe for one second any conference would make a decision like that, but you sure can see where individual schools would decide to bag football. What does a Northwestern/Duke/Vandy lose if they say forget football but we would still like to participate in all other sports in the ACC/SEC/B1G?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/25/us/northwestern-football-players-union/

 

[UConn9604]

First, as the article states, the B1G is not going to kill the golden goose, and second, that article is about the O'Bannon suit, which is different than this topic, even though both will end up paying the players if they lose. I dont believe for one second any conference would make a decision like that, but you sure can see where individual schools would decide to bag football. What does a Northwestern/Duke/Vandy lose if they say forget football but we would still like to participate in all other sports in the ACC/SEC/B1G?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/25/us/northwestern-football-players-union/

I don't believe it at all. I'm convinced it was pure puffing. But, if a union is allowed to maintain any form of toe-hold in college athletics, that will accelerate the process of getting students paid.

I doubt Northwestern or Duke or Vandy punts football in the event that unionization or paying players is allowed, but I can see 50-100 schools giving up the game, and I hope ours isn't one of them.

 

[upstater]

The ruling was incoherent in several key parts.

Here's the official who made the ruling:

1. "In finding that they [Brown graduate instructors] were “primarily students,” the Board held that “students serving as graduate student assistants spend only a limited number of hours performing their duties, and it is beyond dispute that their principal time commitment at Brown is focused on obtaining a degree and, thus, being a student.”

He claims football players spend 40 hours a week at practice. I think this is against NCAA rules. Regardless, grad instructors at many universities teach 2 classes a semester, and they are told that each class takes about 20-25 hours. I think the official is just plain wrong about time constraints. Teaching may actually require more time.

2. "(1) the graduate assistants received the same compensation as the graduate fellows for whom no teaching or research was required; and (2) the graduate assistants’ compensation was not tied to the quality of their work. Unlike the graduate assistants, the facts here show that the Employer never offer a scholarship to a prospective student unless they intend to provide an athletic service to the Employer. In fact, the players can have their scholarships immediately canceled if they voluntarily withdraw from the football team."

Scholarships are given to other non-athletes all the time. And, grad assistants' scholarships are tied to the quality of their work. Students who can't teach do not have their scholarships renewed. It happens all the time. In science heavy disciplines, I'm sure there are research TAs to whom teaching is not the service rendered, but even then, they have to perform their lab duties satisfactorily. If a TA refuses to teach (i.e. drops off the football team) his scholarship is revoked.

3. Here, the Employer’s scholarship players are in a different position than the graduate assistants since the academic faculty members do not oversee the athletic duties that the players’ perform. Instead, football coaches, who are not members of the academic faculty, are responsible for supervising the players’ athletic duties.

Unfortunately, many of us can remember the stories of Pat Dye teaching football 101 at Auburn. Many coaches actually teach classes. Ugh.

4. "Athletic Duties do not Constitute a Core Element of Their Educational Degree Requirements. The second factor that the Board considered in Brown University was the extent to which the graduate assistants’ teaching and research duties constituted a core element of their graduate degree requirements."

The official badly bothced this one. In any department, there are benighted students who get a scholarship without having to teach or perform other duties, and they perfectly fulfill their academic requirements, which means teaching is service. Not part of your academic requirement. You don't have to teach or perform a service to get your degree. Many don't.

Frankly, I'm stunned that the official got so much wrong in this ruling.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

It is not looking good for the major college sports model right now. The NCAA has 3 major suits on hand right now (O’Bannon, Northwestern and anti-trust), each of which could significantly alter the landscape. At least 1 is likely to win. Basically, the NCAA has been blinded to its own greed and does not realize that the line between amateur athletics and business was crossed a long time ago. A lot of lawyers see a lot of money in the NCAA and will not stop until they get their fill.

http://college-football.si.com/2014/03/17/ncaa-antitrust-lawsuit-jeffrey-kessler/

If UConn is kept out of the P5 over the next two years, I say pass the popcorn and watch it burn.

 

[Pat125]

This may be a case of being careful of what you wish for, you may get it. If these decisions survive on appeal, and these students can bargain, this will cause a lot of schools to get out of the Division I business, meaning a lot of students who would have been able to get full scholarships will no longer be able to get them. I can see Northwestern and others before abandoning Division I make the conscious decision to get rid of full scholarships and replace them with the difference between what these student-athletes will get paid under the collective bargaining agreement (or less). So these student-athletes will not get anything more, but the leeches lawyers that brought the suit on their "behalf" will do quite nicely.

 

[upstater]

This may be a case of being careful of what you wish for, you may get it. If these decisions survive on appeal, and these students can bargain, this will cause a lot of schools to get out of the Division I business, meaning a lot of students who would have been able to get full scholarships will no longer be able to get them. I can see Northwestern and others before abandoning Division I make the conscious decision to get rid of full scholarships and replace them with the difference between what these student-athletes will get paid under the collective bargaining agreement (or less). So these student-athletes will not get anything more, but the leeches lawyers that brought the suit on their "behalf" will do quite nicely.

What happens to an ACC filled with private schools like Duke, Miami, BC, Syracuse, Wake Forest?

 

[Pat125]

Not sure. But if full scholarships and paying students becomes the norm, I figure at least three of those schools will go with the new model. But it is possible one or two of those schools phase out of FBS, or all of Division I.

 

[JayRU09]

Oh my god please let this kill Syracuse athletics please please please pleaseeeeeeeeee

 

[BC1978]

What happens to an ACC filled with private schools like Duke, Miami, BC, Syracuse, Wake Forest?

IMO, not all of those school's athletes would vote to join a union. It is hardly a given based on union votes in other sectors. Even if a school's athletes voted to unionize, IMO, the school would have the upper hand regarding compensation, etc. What happens if a school takes a firm stand in the negotiations? What would the student/union members do? Strike? If they do, would their scholarships be suspended?

If this survives all of the expected legal challenges, why wouldn't athletes at state schools simply do the same thing by petitioning their state labor boards to be state employees employed by the state university. Since many states tend to follow the NLRB decisions, this would seem likely scenario for a lot of publics as well.

Even if some schools do not have unionized athletes, it would seem they would have to likely at least replicate the packages of the schools that do to avoid falling behind the competitive curve.

IMO, I don't see any schools dropping big-time sports over this. The compensation issue will, IMO, likely still be small potatos in comparison to the money schools earn.

 

[upstater]

IMO, not all of those school's athletes would vote to join a union. It is hardly a given based on union votes in other sectors. Even if a school's athletes voted to unionize, IMO, the school would have the upper hand regarding compensation, etc. What happens if a school takes a firm stand in the negotiations? What would the student/union members do? Strike? If they do, would their scholarships be suspended?

If this survives all of the expected legal challenges, why wouldn't athletes at state schools simply do the same thing by petitioning their state labor boards to be state employees employed by the state university. Since many states tend to follow the NLRB decisions, this would seem likely scenario for a lot of publics as well.

Even if some schools do not have unionized athletes, it would seem they would have to likely at least replicate the packages of the schools that do to avoid falling behind the competitive curve.

IMO, I don't see any schools dropping big-time sports over this. The compensation issue will, IMO, likely still be small potatos in comparison to the money schools earn.

What the schools earn: ZERO

Northwestern isn't going to engage in labor relations with lawyers from the Steelworkers over its athletics program. The former Pres. of the U. aid they would end it like the Ivies and other did before them.

 

[businesslawyer]

This may be a case of being careful of what you wish for, you may get it. If these decisions survive on appeal, and these students can bargain, this will cause a lot of schools to get out of the Division I business, meaning a lot of students who would have been able to get full scholarships will no longer be able to get them. I can see Northwestern and others before abandoning Division I make the conscious decision to get rid of full scholarships and replace them with the difference between what these student-athletes will get paid under the collective bargaining agreement (or less). So these student-athletes will not get anything more, but the leeches lawyers that brought the suit on their "behalf" will do quite nicely.

Be careful with some of those sweeping statements. This decision is not relevant to state schools, and there is no reason to think state schools are going to allow players to unionize and be paid merely because private schools have to do so. They just keep NCAA rules the way they are and let private schools give up the ghost or form their own version of the NCAA.

 

[UConnJim]

If the private schools did leave FBS football, think about this: ACC + Big 12 - private schools = 17 teams. (excluding ND) SEC - Vanderbilt = 15 schools. ACC/Big 12 merge and one teams goes to the SEC. Big 10 - Northwestern = 13 schools. One school moves to Big 10.

 

[justinslot]

Be careful with some of those sweeping statements. This decision is not relevant to state schools, and there is no reason to think state schools are going to allow players to unionize and be paid merely because private schools have to do so. They just keep NCAA rules the way they are and let private schools give up the ghost or form their own version of the NCAA.

Wait, I thought any decisions for public schools would be up to their state's labor boards, and not up to the schools themselves. So if you were a public school in a state with a heavy union presence--like, I don't know, Michigan or Illinois--athletes at those schools might not face a lot of obstacles to unionization. But if you're at one of those Southern states where people hate the idea of workers organizing because they still yearn for an aristocracy to put them in their place, you might have a lot of trouble unionizing, and that's only if you got past powerful institutional figures with influence and a whole lot "there won't be no dadgum union at THIS school, I can tell you THAT" in their heads. (The schools I'm thinking of are obviously of the So Everybody's Cheating type, who will find other ways to pay off their players if unionization becomes a recruiting advantage, as they always have.)

 

[businesslawyer]

Wait, I thought any decisions for public schools would be up to their state's labor boards, and not up to the schools themselves. So if you were a public school in a state with a heavy union presence--like, I don't know, Michigan or Illinois--athletes at those schools might not face a lot of obstacles to unionization. But if you're at one of those Southern states where people hate the idea of workers organizing because they still yearn for an aristocracy to put them in their place, you might have a lot of trouble unionizing, and that's only if you got past powerful institutional figures with influence and a whole lot "there won't be no dadgum union at THIS school, I can tell you THAT" in their heads. (The schools I'm thinking of are obviously of the So Everybody's Cheating type, who will find other ways to pay off their players if unionization becomes a recruiting advantage, as they always have.)

You are correct, it is not up to the schools themselves. But it is up to the States themselves.

 

[TerryD]

This is what Brian Kelly said about this a month ago:

"Last thing from me. I know it's somewhat of an older issue now, but the young man at Northwestern that was trying to get the union going, did you take the temperature of your team about the issues that he wanted to express with regard to the union? Do you feel like it's something that you need to be concerned about or need to talk to your team about at Notre Dame?


COACH KELLY: I chose not to talk about it with our team. I've talked about it with our staff and certainly our administration and Jack Swarbrick, we've had a conversation about it, because it's real; it would affect, in the national labor relations board finds that private universities that student athletes are workers, it has a substantial impact.

Now, my take is, if it turns out that way, we're going to have a significant advantage over every program in the country, because I don't think we're dropping football any time soon here. So we're going to pay compensation, we're going to pay all those things; I think our scholarship stands by itself, and add that to it, I think we're in a pretty good situation.

I don't think the NCAA is going to allow that to happen. I'm sure as heck Michigan is not going to allow that to happen. I think there's so many hurdles here that I didn't think it was the time or the place to bring it up to our team, because I just think it's‑‑ there's so many hurdles there before it gets to them.

But it was a discussion that I had with our athletic director and our staff, just because if it was brought up by a parent or if it was brought up by somebody, that we were all of the same opinion; and that is, as we stand right now, we believe that the value of a degree from Notre Dame stands by itself and that that should be just compensation for the time that a student athlete gives to Notre Dame."


ND is not going to give up football.

In fact, if this ruling stands (uncertain), there are discussions that this would actually give wealthy private schools like ND a recruiting advantage. They would not be paying improper benefits.

In fact, they would be following Federal labor laws by negotiating in good faith with the players' unions and offering an attractive compensation package.

Who knows? Time will tell.

 

[billybud]

Won't phase the SEC's dominance.

They have a great history of paying players...won't have to have surreptitious bag men delivering "signing bonuses" since it would all be out in the open

 

[upstater]

Wait, I thought any decisions for public schools would be up to their state's labor boards, and not up to the schools themselves. So if you were a public school in a state with a heavy union presence--like, I don't know, Michigan or Illinois--athletes at those schools might not face a lot of obstacles to unionization. But if you're at one of those Southern states where people hate the idea of workers organizing because they still yearn for an aristocracy to put them in their place, you might have a lot of trouble unionizing, and that's only if you got past powerful institutional figures with influence and a whole lot "there won't be no dadgum union at THIS school, I can tell you THAT" in their heads. (The schools I'm thinking of are obviously of the So Everybody's Cheating type, who will find other ways to pay off their players if unionization becomes a recruiting advantage, as they always have.)

It would play out in a number of ways. if the northern schools unionized and began paying players, the southern schools would start paying them, maybe within a union structure. Love of college football would supercede hatred of unions.

I still say that those who dismiss Delany's talk of the schools walking away are not paying close attention. But before schools ever walked away, there's a lot they could do, actually. They could pay players a large stipend and remove room & board from their benefits package. Just give each player $15k outright. That would largely fulfill the requisites of consider these players employees.

 

[upstater]

An interesting aspect of this whole case is for the potential to overturn the Brown ruling, which would treat grad instructors as employees. And if that happens, the money has to come from somewhere.

 

[businesslawyer]

This is what Brian Kelly said about this a month ago:

"Last thing from me. I know it's somewhat of an older issue now, but the young man at Northwestern that was trying to get the union going, did you take the temperature of your team about the issues that he wanted to express with regard to the union? Do you feel like it's something that you need to be concerned about or need to talk to your team about at Notre Dame?


COACH KELLY: I chose not to talk about it with our team. I've talked about it with our staff and certainly our administration and Jack Swarbrick, we've had a conversation about it, because it's real; it would affect, in the national labor relations board finds that private universities that student athletes are workers, it has a substantial impact.

Now, my take is, if it turns out that way, we're going to have a significant advantage over every program in the country, because I don't think we're dropping football any time soon here. So we're going to pay compensation, we're going to pay all those things; I think our scholarship stands by itself, and add that to it, I think we're in a pretty good situation.

I don't think the NCAA is going to allow that to happen. I'm sure as heck Michigan is not going to allow that to happen. I think there's so many hurdles here that I didn't think it was the time or the place to bring it up to our team, because I just think it's‑‑ there's so many hurdles there before it gets to them.

But it was a discussion that I had with our athletic director and our staff, just because if it was brought up by a parent or if it was brought up by somebody, that we were all of the same opinion; and that is, as we stand right now, we believe that the value of a degree from Notre Dame stands by itself and that that should be just compensation for the time that a student athlete gives to Notre Dame."


ND is not going to give up football.

In fact, if this ruling stands (uncertain), there are discussions that this would actually give wealthy private schools like ND a recruiting advantage. They would not be paying improper benefits.

In fact, they would be following Federal labor laws by negotiating in good faith with the players' unions and offering an attractive compensation package.

Who knows? Time will tell.

It won't give them an advantage if the NCAA doesn't change its rules to allow players to be paid. Then Notre Dame would have no one to play.

 

[billybud]

Florida unionization would mean little if the athletes were determined to be employees of the university. The issue would not be unionization, but rather classification as an employee.

State and university employees are forbidden by law from striking, the legislature sets benefits and gives out annual money in the budgeting process, there is little real negotiation.

State workers unions, other then law enforcement, are toothless with few paying members. Four percent of the state's work force are union members.

It would be interesting to watch the tax code guys go to work. If you are an employee of the university..and the benefits that you receive are a result of being an employee...does that make the tuition costs, apartment costs, three free meals a day, books and supplies, etc..all taxable as income?

 

[FAIRTIDES]

First, as the article states, the B1G is not going to kill the golden goose, and second, that article is about the O'Bannon suit, which is different than this topic, even though both will end up paying the players if they lose. I dont believe for one second any conference would make a decision like that, but you sure can see where individual schools would decide to bag football. What does a Northwestern/Duke/Vandy lose if they say forget football but we would still like to participate in all other sports in the ACC/SEC/B1G?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/25/us/northwestern-football-players-union/

More on the "why" some players think this way from the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/s...0140406&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=34225134&_r=0