Yet another massive headache for the NCAA... (link)

[BlueMAB]

The point is that the NCAA doesn't make the rules anymore. As for public vs. private, it's all workers. The lawsuit was brought by a private company. So even though the judge temporarily blocked it for gov't workers, the ones seeking relief in the actual suit were a private company.

But they didn't get any relief because the judgement was only for state employees. So unless and until a ruling includes private employees/employers, it's quite simply not "all workers".

From the article: "The injunction temporarily halts the implementation of the DOL final rule for government employees of the state of Texas. All other employers should continue to implement the requirements of the final rule effective July 1, 2024."

And it's not "all state law". The lawsuit was brought because of a Federal Department of Labor case. The power struggle is between state law and federal agencies.

I believe a combination of collective bargaining and contracted athletes are the solutions, and this thread feels unnecessarily pollyannish.

 

[temery]

Good point. Yeah, they don't make as much for the school as sports, not even close, but tickets to school performances cost money and the students get nothing. Also, to say that theatre and Orchestra groups are student led??? Ummmm...what? If my theatre friends in college were controlling the performances, they'd be doing 'Hair' instead of 'the cherry orchard' and the nude scene would NOT get cut.

A scholarship isn't 'nothing.' If they want to be employees, they can pay tuition, room, food, fees, etc.

 

[upstater]

But they didn't get any relief because the judgement was only for state employees. So unless and until a ruling includes private employees/employers, it's quite simply not "all workers".

From the article: "The injunction temporarily halts the implementation of the DOL final rule for government employees of the state of Texas. All other employers should continue to implement the requirements of the final rule effective July 1, 2024."

And it's not "all state law". The lawsuit was brought because of a Federal Department of Labor case. The power struggle is between state law and federal agencies.

I believe a combination of collective bargaining and contracted athletes are the solutions, and this thread feels unnecessarily pollyannish.

You think that athletes being treated as employees is no big deal? It's a sea change from the current system.

 

[BlueMAB]

You think that athletes being treated as employees is no big deal? It's a sea change from the current system.

Pollyannish was obviously the wrong word.

I didn’t say it’s a not a big deal. I don’t see it as a massive headache. They’ve been treated like employees for decades.

 

[BlueMAB]

A scholarship isn't 'nothing.' If they want to be employees, they can pay tuition, room, food, fees, etc.

This is such antiquated thinking.

Employers pay for their employees’ tuition, room, food, licensing fees, etc all the time. Fringe benefits are common.

Making students pay for those things will just result in them simply negotiating for more money to offset the cost. Those things are already simply part of their compensation.

Dan Hurley gets 20 tickets/game, 5 parking passes, a country club membership, $15k annual allowance for a vehicle (can’t afford his own on his salary?), but the players should pay for their food and housing? They are required to remain academically eligible, so they have to go to class to play, but if you want to treat them like that, are you going to pay them for the hours they are in class since it is part of the job?

 

[BlueMAB]

This is such antiquated thinking.

Employers pay for their employees’ tuition, room, food, licensing fees, etc all the time. Fringe benefits are common.

Making students pay for those things will just result in them simply negotiating for more money to offset the cost. Those things are already simply part of their compensation.

Dan Hurley gets 20 tickets/game, 5 parking passes, a country club membership, $15k annual allowance for a vehicle (can’t afford his own on his salary?), but the players should pay for their food and housing? They are required to remain academically eligible, so they have to go to class to play, but if you want to treat them like that, are you going to pay them for the hours they are in class since it is part of the job?

@temery my mistake, missed that you were discussing a different class of students.

 

[upstater]

Pollyannish was obviously the wrong word.

I didn’t say it’s a not a big deal. I don’t see it as a massive headache. They’ve been treated like employees for decades.

This really changes everything institutionally. The class of employees is treated entirely different than students, both inside institutions but also state by state. It's a sea change.

 

[upstater]

This is such antiquated thinking.

Employers pay for their employees’ tuition, room, food, licensing fees, etc all the time. Fringe benefits are common.

Making students pay for those things will just result in them simply negotiating for more money to offset the cost. Those things are already simply part of their compensation.

Dan Hurley gets 20 tickets/game, 5 parking passes, a country club membership, $15k annual allowance for a vehicle (can’t afford his own on his salary?), but the players should pay for their food and housing? They are required to remain academically eligible, so they have to go to class to play, but if you want to treat them like that, are you going to pay them for the hours they are in class since it is part of the job?

This is the whole problem. You have students, TAs, that bring even more money to the university, and they don't receive this compensation either. You have a whole class of employees. The whole thinking is weird, especially when the vast majority of the schools ADs are in the red. Makes you scratch your head.

 

[temery]

@temery my mistake, missed that you were discussing a different class of students.

No, you were right the first time.

 

[CJasmer]

This is the whole problem. You have students, TAs, that bring even more money to the university, and they don't receive this compensation either. You have a whole class of employees. The whole thinking is weird, especially when the vast majority of the schools ADs are in the red. Makes you scratch your head.

I disagree. The top 20 FBS teams are not in the red. The losses are caused by football and basketball funding the whole athletic department. I think what is fair is each sport within a college share only the net profit they bring in. This means at most schools only athletes getting paid would be football and basketball players. That is fair and equitable to the athletes that actually generate the revenue. The issue will be Title IX. Will a judge decide all athletes at a school should get to share in the money generated mainly by football.

 

[CJasmer]

I disagree. The top 20 FBS teams are not in the red. The losses are caused by football and basketball funding the whole athletic department. I think what is fair is each sport within a college share only the net profit they bring in. This means at most schools only athletes getting paid would be football and basketball players. That is fair and equitable to the athletes that actually generate the revenue. The issue will be Title IX. Will a judge decide all athletes at a school should get to share in the money generated mainly by football.

Same analogy is NBA vs WNBA where NBA basically is keeping WNBA afloat.

 

[BlueMAB]

You have students, TAs, that bring even more money to the university, and they don't receive this compensation either.

Show your work.

 

[Kolumbo]

This is the whole problem. You have students, TAs, that bring even more money to the university, and they don't receive this compensation either. You have a whole class of employees. The whole thinking is weird, especially when the vast majority of the schools ADs are in the red. Makes you scratch your head.

Students and TAs receive a degree, that is what they are working towards. That is their compensation. I paid tuition in exchange for a degree so I don't consider that an employer-employee relationship. TAs and kids who receive scholarships could be considered employees I suppose. They're receiving a benefit with no financial cost.

 

[upstater]

Students and TAs receive a degree, that is what they are working towards. That is their compensation. I paid tuition in exchange for a degree so I don't consider that an employer-employee relationship. TAs and kids who receive scholarships could be considered employees I suppose. They're receiving a benefit with no financial cost.

O, so, they're in the same class as athletes.

 

[temery]

O, so, they're in the same class as athletes.

Same class as 95% of athletes, yes. A very small number bring in money to the university.

 

[Kolumbo]

O, so, they're in the same class as athletes.

Not literally. The athletes usually don't attend class.

But in theory, yes. If they receive a scholarship, they are receiving a benefit. Usually not taxable income, but a benefit nevertheless.

 

[upstater]

Show your work.

TAs in this country teach a 1-1 or a 2-2 plus summer and winter sessions to make ends meet.

Let's take a B1G school. Penn State. They teach a 2-2. You pick up an extra course in the summer for $3k.

5 courses x 40 students = 200 students a year. $4.5k per student ($1k for in-staters, $2k out of staters per credit x 3 credits per course, 50% of students out of state [int'l students pay even more]). 200 x $4.5k = $900k.

 

[upstater]

Not literally. The athletes usually don't attend class.

But in theory, yes. If they receive a scholarship, they are receiving a benefit. Usually not taxable income, but a benefit nevertheless.

I agree with this, but this is the reason I compared the 2 in the first place.

 

[upstater]

Same class as 95% of athletes, yes. A very small number bring in money to the university.

I would say that TAs and regular students are certainly sources of big revenues to the university. They are probably the main source of revenue at most universities.

 

[dennismenace]

Isn’t there some line about knowing a society is headed downhill when the number of lawyers exceeds the number of engineers?

I remember a quote some years back saying we were graduating 10 -1 for lawyers to engineers. We are also losing doctors to the law field as well. A lot of this can have a Wall St background because of the money.

When Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks he said:
"Because that's where the money is"

 

[prankster]

But in theory, yes. If they receive a scholarship, they are receiving a benefit. Usually not taxable income, but a benefit nevertheless.

"Imputed income"?

 

[temery]

I would say that TAs and regular students are certainly sources of big revenues to the university. They are probably the main source of revenue at most universities.

edit: a very small number of athletes bring in revenue.

 

[BlueMAB]

TAs in this country teach a 1-1 or a 2-2 plus summer and winter sessions to make ends meet.

Let's take a B1G school. Penn State. They teach a 2-2. You pick up an extra course in the summer for $3k.

5 courses x 40 students = 200 students a year. $4.5k per student ($1k for in-staters, $2k out of staters per credit x 3 credits per course, 50% of students out of state [int'l students pay even more]). 200 x $4.5k = $900k.

Option 1) replace the TAs with professors
Option 2) eliminate summer and winter sessions (we've seen this with schools eliminating sports to comply with Title IX and due to budgetary concerns).
Option 3) TAs attempt to unionize and collectively bargain

I'm not sure who exactly you're referring to when you say "TAs bring in even more money", but it can't be the student-athletes.

With the Big Ten’s recently announced additions of USC and UCLA, the new media deal is expected to bring “more than $7 billion” to the conference, per ESPN’s Adam Rittenberg. Furthermore, Rittenberg said the conference is expected to distribute “$80 million-$100 million per year to each of its 16 members.”

 

[BlueMAB]

edit: a very small number of athletes bring in revenue.

edit: a very small number of athletes bring in profits.
revenue =/= profit.

 

[upstater]

Option 1) replace the TAs with professors
Option 2) eliminate summer and winter sessions (we've seen this with schools eliminating sports to comply with Title IX and due to budgetary concerns).
Option 3) TAs attempt to unionize and collectively bargain

I'm not sure who exactly you're referring to when you say "TAs bring in even more money", but it can't be the student-athletes.

With the Big Ten’s recently announced additions of USC and UCLA, the new media deal is expected to bring “more than $7 billion” to the conference, per ESPN’s Adam Rittenberg. Furthermore, Rittenberg said the conference is expected to distribute “$80 million-$100 million per year to each of its 16 members.”

??

Summer and winter sessions are huge profit makers for schools. WHy are we eliminating them? Schools are paying $3k per class to the employees, that's below minimum wage.

What are you trying to accomplish?

That link you gave shows the athletes are making less than $900k per athlete which is what I calculated above. If you factor in expenses of coaching salaries, trainers, support, travel, stadiums, etc., it's much much much less.