Paying college athletes

[jedicurt]

This is not how it would go at all.

i mean if you can find the legal way for them to actually unionize and not violate Title IX, then feel free to explain it to us. but the Universities wouldn't be able to collectively bargain with just the football team as it would be a Title IX violation.

so you can keep saying that isn't how it would go. but you are the one who would suggest they would unionize in that scenario, even though it looks like they can't because of already in place Federal law, or if they unionize, they would have to include all scholarship athletes. But if you happen to know how they can get around that, please feel free to share and provide your information to back it up, or any information as to how what i am saying is incorrect. until then, i think this conversation is over.

[Rover]

Word it however you want. They are getting paid because they engage in their activity at a specific school.

That is certainly your non-legal description. Doesn't change what they are actually, who's paying them, and how they are getting paid.

[PoliSciGuy]

Word it however you want. They are getting paid because they engage in their activity at a specific school.

That is abstracting away a lot of very critical information. The colleges pay nothing (outside of scholarships).

[BoulderSooner]

i mean if you can find the legal way for them to actually unionize and not violate Title IX, then feel free to explain it to us. but the Universities wouldn't be able to collectively bargain with just the football team as it would be a Title IX violation.

so you can keep saying that isn't how it would go. but you are the one who would suggest they would unionize in that scenario, even though it looks like they can't because of already in place Federal law, or if they unionize, they would have to include all scholarship athletes. But if you happen to know how they can get around that, please feel free to share and provide your information to back it up, or any information as to how what i am saying is incorrect. until then, i think this conversation is over.

when they become employees they won't be students any more ... and in fact OU football INC (or what ever you want to call it ... would likely just rent facilities from and license names and colors from the university ..

[jedicurt]

when they become employees they won't be students any more ... and in fact OU football INC (or what ever you want to call it ... would likely just rent facilities from and license names and colors from the university ..

That doesn't matter for title IX. It has to do with the athletic programs themselves being treated equally. Even if they are university employees, they are still part of the athletic program. The school would not be able to bargain with the athletes of one program differently than all other programs, so the only way universities could bargain would be if it's a singular union for all sports programs. And as we have already stated, at very few schools does football make up a majority of all athletes for all programs.

Back in reality, it's pretty clear that your scenario won't happen, as they are not employees of the school, and as we have now circled back to again, federal law would currently forbid it.

It would take a repeal of title IX for that to happen

[Dob Hooligan]

I maintain a system man makes is a system that can be "cheated". If you want to argue if players are paid by the school, or how much, then think about how Head Coach is paid. Probably something like $1 million per year on a 3 year, State limited contract; $4 million from Big Shoe Brand; $2 million from Golden Gridiron Partners III; and $1 million, plus a pair of 3 row SUV & one 2 seat roadster from Blue Sky Auto Group. Now how is he getting paid and how much does it matter?

[BoulderSooner]

That doesn't matter for title IX. It has to do with the athletic programs themselves being treated equally. Even if they are university employees, they are still part of the athletic program. The school would not be able to bargain with the athletes of one program differently than all other programs, so the only way universities could bargain would be if it's a singular union for all sports programs. And as we have already stated, at very few schools does football make up a majority of all athletes for all programs.

Back in reality, it's pretty clear that your scenario won't happen, as they are not employees of the school, and as we have now circled back to again, federal law would currently forbid it.

It would take a repeal of title IX for that to happen

no as employees and not students they wouldn't be part of the athletic programs .. and title IX would not apply .. it would be an entirely new system

without federal law that is where this is headed .. and sooner rather then later ...

[Jersey Boss]

I predict a G league type set up if the Manchin Tuberville proposal ever becomes law.(Not that it will even be voted on). Football and basketball players are not going to stay at one school for a forced 3 years.
Interesting that these two senators claimed to have spoken with so called "stake holders" yet fail to mention any talks with players.
To speculate on an evolution to unionized employees playing collegiate football is no more than worst case speculative opinion. I for one do not see the sky falling. Nor do I see the governing body allowing non athletes to compete.

[Jersey Boss]

but if we are talking about athletes forming a union because they are employees of the school. i think they would have to do it across all sports. it would have to be a union of all scholarship athletes. because if basis for formation of the union was being an NCAA scholarship athlete, from a legal standpoint there is no difference between a football scholarship and a softball scholarship. then with that union, i don't think football players would have the majority choice and as such, it wouldn't matter if they wouldn't want to, they would be outvoted by their own union.

Exactly. The whole idea of collective bargaining is that it benefits all.

[April in the Plaza]

Exactly. The whole idea of collective bargaining is that it benefits all.

not exactly.

[Rover]

Exactly. The whole idea of collective bargaining is that it benefits all.

It really just more evenly distributes leverage to help neutralize the huge advantage that management has. Think of management as the union for ownership. Since they are united, workers should have the same right. Negotiating shouldn’t happen one worker to one shareholder at a time. Both side should have a fair opportunity to represent the interests of their entire group of constituents.

[Jersey Boss]

It really just more evenly distributes leverage to help neutralize the huge advantage that management has. Think of management as the union for ownership. Since they are united, workers should have the same right. Negotiating shouldn’t happen one worker to one shareholder at a time. Both side should have a fair opportunity to represent the interests of their entire group of constituents.

You're preaching to the choir. I was raised in a union household and had been a member in the past. I know having been involved in a ULP the worth of membership.

[jedicurt]

no as employees and not students they wouldn't be part of the athletic programs .. and title IX would not apply .. it would be an entirely new system

without federal law that is where this is headed .. and sooner rather then later ...

i mean the federal government disagrees with you and says that it applies to employees as well. as it currently applies to professors and staff. sooo... think you just don't understand everything Title IX actually covers.

[BoulderSooner]

i mean the federal government disagrees with you and says that it applies to employees as well. as it currently applies to professors and staff. sooo... think you just don't understand everything Title IX actually covers.

no it doesn't disagree with me in any way ..


if you think that womens rowers are going to be in the same union and make the same as football players ... then i have lots of ocean front property in arizona to sell you ..

[jedicurt]

no it doesn't disagree with me in any way ..


if you think that womens rowers are going to be in the same union and make the same as football players ... then i have lots of ocean front property in arizona to sell you ..

"Because Title IX does not contain limiting language as does Title VI, the courts have concluded that Title IX reaches employment discrimination in the educational programs or activities of recipients without limitation."

https://www.justice.gov/crt/title-ix...Discrimination

So from the doj website. Yes, you are wrong, title IX discrimination applies to employees as well, and thus the school would not be able to collectively bargain with a union that was only made up of football players. I mean we can keep going back and forth, but I'm going to take the doj website over your opinions on the matter.

[jedicurt]

no it doesn't disagree with me in any way ..


if you think that womens rowers are going to be in the same union and make the same as football players ... then i have lots of ocean front property in arizona to sell you ..

And remember. I haven't said that a union will be formed, infact I don't think that athletes want to be employees, and so I don't think unions are even an option. I'm just saying yet again that your scenario that they will make a union and that it was "undeniable" was actually pretty easy to deny, since the schools and NCAA couldnt legally bargain with said hypothetical union.

[Rover]

no it doesn't disagree with me in any way ..


if you think that womens rowers are going to be in the same union and make the same as football players ... then i have lots of ocean front property in arizona to sell you ..

All union workers working for the same employer don’t make the same pay. There are usually pay scales dependent on skills required, experience, etc.

[April in the Plaza]

All union workers working for the same employer don’t make the same pay. There are usually pay scales dependent on skills required, experience, etc.

Exactly. UPS pays its union drivers very handsomely but the rest of the union staff is paid crumbs to offset the exorbitant driver pay.

[mugofbeer]

UPS drivers work their rear ends off and often end up with chronic physical ailments. They negotiate traffic and work in rain, snow and 100 degree heat without a/c in many cases still. They are required to work until their truck is empty and have difficult delivery quotas. Yeah, their pay is "exorbitant."

[BoulderSooner]

"Because Title IX does not contain limiting language as does Title VI, the courts have concluded that Title IX reaches employment discrimination in the educational programs or activities of recipients without limitation."

https://www.justice.gov/crt/title-ix...Discrimination

So from the doj website. Yes, you are wrong, title IX discrimination applies to employees as well, and thus the school would not be able to collectively bargain with a union that was only made up of football players. I mean we can keep going back and forth, but I'm going to take the doj website over your opinions on the matter.

they would not be part of any educational program ..

[BoulderSooner]

And remember. I haven't said that a union will be formed, infact I don't think that athletes want to be employees, and so I don't think unions are even an option. I'm just saying yet again that your scenario that they will make a union and that it was "undeniable" was actually pretty easy to deny, since the schools and NCAA couldnt legally bargain with said hypothetical union.

some football players have already tried to unionize .. the business of college sports is going to continue to change ... and it is really easy to see where it is headed without federal legislation ..

[jedicurt]

they would not be part of any educational program ..

/facepalm... you just keep proving that you know absolutely nothing about how universities are organized and governed. "or activities" is the key part of that phrase that you missed. you just needed to read two more words.

[jedicurt]

some football players have already tried to unionize .. the business of college sports is going to continue to change ... and it is really easy to see where it is headed without federal legislation ..

and it failed. because the NRLB ruled that it didn't have jurisdiction over educational institutions. that is why it failed at northwestern back in 2014-15, and what people seemed to miss in the 2022 NRLB statement in california. that they felt that student athletes are mistreated, but that they don't have the jurisdiction for further ruling. so now, it really doesn't look like that is where it is headed anytime soon.

[BoulderSooner]

/facepalm... you just keep proving that you know absolutely nothing about how universities are organized and governed. "or activities" is the key part of that phrase that you missed. you just needed to read two more words.

and you clearly don't understand where college football is going ..

[jedicurt]

and you clearly don't understand where college football is going ..

i mean... i guess you are right. i only know that the attempts to create a union so far have all failed because the NRLB says they don't have jurisdiction and it's a title ix issue for jurisdiction. [SARCASM] so, guess myself, the NRLB, the NCAA, universities, and the DOJ are all in the dark, and you are the only one who actually knows what is happening. which of course you have proven with all of your comments of proof to back it up. [/SARCASM]