College Athlete Unions

[RockRaines]

And that's how every business in the world works. Why should student athletes get special treatment?

Well, it depends. Some people would call that a sweat shop model since the players really arent getting paid what could be called the minimum rate if you take into account the education is just training and not actual compensation.

 

Personally I think this whole thing is bulls***. One of their main points were having athletes who get hurt or leave be able to finish their education, well I know in public schools like OSU they can come back and finish for FREE at any time. Second they were concerned about medical treatment, these guys get 1000% better medical attention than the common college kid. Third, they DO get a stipend that is quite generous. Many of these kids blow it on stuff they shouldnt be using it for and have nothing left and call poor. They want to go out and "buy food", well their meals are 100% paid for by the school if you eat where you should be eating. I understand some kids are poorer than others and need extra cash, the easiest thing would be treat them like you would for financial aid and be able to give those hardship cases an additional sum.

 

Becoming "employees" is the WORST thing they can do IMO. Now you open up tax issues and insurance issues that I dont think they thought about.

[bmags]

And it's not irrelevant. The whole point of this movement is how unfair it is that these poor athletes have all these restrictions on them and they make the school so much money and they don't get a slice of the pie. And we all know that's bulls*** because they do get a slice.

 

Again, I think this is inaccurate.

 

Recently we found out that dozens of tech companies basically organized a cartel to not steal eachothers managers and developers because wages were getting too high and cutting into profits.

 

Software developers and engineers make great money! Their income was going up in those years! But the fact is their wages were deliberately being kept lower than they should have been in ways that was not affecting the CEO pay or bonus structure - which was being set by the market.

 

In professional sports, the top athletes salaries by and large eclipse the coaches and general manager pay.

 

If the schools suddenly want to tax player income and TRULY feel like athletic scholarships are money out of their pocket, rather than listen to athletes demands, I'll happily watch it blow up in their face.

[StrangeSox]

Becoming "employees" is the WORST thing they can do IMO. Now you open up tax issues and insurance issues that I dont think they thought about.

 

Grad students receive scholarships and stipends while still being able to unionize, and I don't think they're hit with any tax issues.

[Jenksismyhero]

Again, I think this is inaccurate.

 

Recently we found out that dozens of tech companies basically organized a cartel to not steal eachothers managers and developers because wages were getting too high and cutting into profits.

 

Software developers and engineers make great money! Their income was going up in those years! But the fact is their wages were deliberately being kept lower than they should have been in ways that was not affecting the CEO pay or bonus structure - which was being set by the market.

 

In professional sports, the top athletes salaries by and large eclipse the coaches and general manager pay.

 

If the schools suddenly want to tax player income and TRULY feel like athletic scholarships are money out of their pocket, rather than listen to athletes demands, I'll happily watch it blow up in their face.

 

But you realize if college went to a pure market system, 99% of the athletes would probably be worse off right? The vast majority of student athletes don't make a dime for the school. They COST the school money. If we go for a pure market system say goodbye to 90% of a school's athletic department. They'd offer mens/women's basketball, football and one other female equivalent sport to abide by Title IX. Everything else is scrapped and put towards mens basketball and football. And even then, the money is going to the 1% of kids that are actual stars, and the rest will share the crumbs. How is that system any better?

 

[Soxbadger]

Again, I think this is inaccurate.

 

Recently we found out that dozens of tech companies basically organized a cartel to not steal eachothers managers and developers because wages were getting too high and cutting into profits.

 

Software developers and engineers make great money! Their income was going up in those years! But the fact is their wages were deliberately being kept lower than they should have been in ways that was not affecting the CEO pay or bonus structure - which was being set by the market.

 

Recently we found out that tech companies are really stupid and dont have attorneys, because you could have legally done what they wanted by putting a restrictive covenant into the employee agreement. Non-compete, non-solicitation, are allowable.

 

Not sure what this has to do with unionization.

[StrangeSox]

Recently we found out that tech companies are really stupid and dont have attorneys, because you could have legally done what they wanted by putting a restrictive covenant into the employee agreement. Non-compete, non-solicitation, are allowable.

 

Not sure what this has to do with unionization.

 

I've read that California has pretty strict laws about those sorts of non-competes, and of course if its explicit and upfront people will often demand compensation for signing one.

[StrangeSox]

But you realize if college went to a pure market system, 99% of the athletes would probably be worse off right? The vast majority of student athletes don't make a dime for the school. They COST the school money. If we go for a pure market system say goodbye to 90% of a school's athletic department. They'd offer mens/women's basketball, football and one other female equivalent sport to abide by Title IX. Everything else is scrapped and put towards mens basketball and football. And even then, the money is going to the 1% of kids that are actual stars, and the rest will share the crumbs. How is that system any better?

Just for the record, again, the NW players aren't asking for the abolition of the NCAA or college sports, they are asking to be recognized as a bargaining unit so that they can have a say in scholarship rules, rules that govern the athletes' responsibilities, health coverage, scheduling expansions, etc. They are explicitly not asking for pay.

[Jenksismyhero]

Just for the record, again, the NW players aren't asking for the abolition of the NCAA or college sports, they are asking to be recognized as a bargaining unit so that they can have a say in scholarship rules, rules that govern the athletes' responsibilities, health coverage, scheduling expansions, etc. They are explicitly not asking for pay.

 

I acknowledged that in my first post. But that's going to be the result if they're considered employees of the school. I think you'll find someone out there - be it a congressman, an IRS agent, or the University itself - asking for the law to be changed so that scholarships/stipends are considered pay, not financial aid or grants.

 

I mean, logically, how can you on the one hand say that these guys are employees because they lack any connection to the educational aspect of a scholarship, but then turn around and say that the scholarship and stipend are not pay for services, but aids to their education costs? That makes zero sense.

[bmags]

Recently we found out that tech companies are really stupid and dont have attorneys, because you could have legally done what they wanted by putting a restrictive covenant into the employee agreement. Non-compete, non-solicitation, are allowable.

 

Not sure what this has to do with unionization.

 

Non compete and non-solicitation are not allowed in California.

 

The point is regardless of whether you find someone's pay large enough to live on, such as engineers, if their pay is being restricted either illegally or unfairly, it shouldn't matter that they make more than a typical student or employee.

[StrangeSox]

I acknowledged that in my first post. But that's going to be the result if they're considered employees of the school. I think you'll find someone out there - be it a congressman, an IRS agent, or the University itself - asking for the law to be changed so that scholarships/stipends are considered pay, not financial aid or grants.

 

I mean, logically, how can you on the one hand say that these guys are employees because they lack any connection to the educational aspect of a scholarship, but then turn around and say that the scholarship and stipend are not pay for services, but aids to their education costs? That makes zero sense.

 

I'm unclear how the University would benefit from that change--it seems more like being vindictive than anything. You'd also have to craft the law in a way that only athletic scholarships are impacted.

 

Again I don't see how this is any different from graduate student unions. They receive scholarships and stipends, but they're also considered employees.

[Soxbadger]

Non compete and non-solicitation are not allowed in California.

 

The point is regardless of whether you find someone's pay large enough to live on, such as engineers, if their pay is being restricted either illegally or unfairly, it shouldn't matter that they make more than a typical student or employee.

 

Thats not entirely true. CA allows for them if there are trade secrets involved. If you look at Apple/Google etc and all of the patent lawsuits, its pretty easy to cloak a non-compete as protecting trade secrets. IE Employee has information about potential patent of Apples, it is unfair for that employee to bring that knowledge to Google and potentially have Google beat Apple to the punch.

 

Still an even simpler solution would be to move their corporate headquarters to another state that does not have a public policy rule against. These deals were only about the top guys, like COO etc.

 

Either way its unnecessary to collude through back channels. Even worse, its unenforceable. Just flat out stupid.

 

I still dont get how this applies to Northwestern or to unions. In the tech case you had CEOs explicitly trying to circumvent the US law, in the NU case there are no such allegations. NU student athletes somehow think being in a union will be better, Im just saying, Im not sure that they are really correct.

Edited March 27, 2014 by Soxbadger

[Kyyle23]

The NLRB rejects the attempt to unionize