An excerpt of this appeared in NYT Room for Debate
National Labor Relations Board’s ruling that qualifies
Northwestern football players as employees of the university and grants them the
right to unionize is creating much debate around the issue of athletic reform
in college athletics. I applaud the activism of these athletes to seek measures
to obtain just treatment and a voice in the decision making process that impact
their lives. It speaks to the sophistication and determination these modern day
college athletes are willing to exhibit in order to bring about reform. This
ruling is an example of their grassroots activism; the kind that is necessary
to encourage athletic reform.
On the other hand, I am
disappointed in the inertia of the NCAA, which has forced the hands of athletes
to seek change and resolution externally. The NCAA efforts have been quite
reactionary and defensive instead of proactive and visionary since the
onslaught of cases that are challenging amateurism. Maybe their track record of
losing in the lower courts and winning in the higher court is a tactical strategy
they find successful. Maybe there are simply exhibiting “too big to fail” that
is pervasive among corporations of this size.
I have mixed emotions
about the application of this ruling because of the distance that exist between
this ruling and the actual implementation of it. The process of appeals could
go on for years before athletes actually benefit from having a union.
Northwestern University officials have stated that they will appeal this
decision. Until the development of a functional college players union, athletes
will be enduring academic neglect and medical injuries that threatens their
ability to be mentally and physically functional citizens.
Also, clearly there are
pros (e.g., better wages, medical benefits, job security, etc.,) and cons (e.g.,
annual dues and fees, individuality, employee & employer collegiality,
etc.) of having a union; however, I question whether this is the right
methodology for college athletes; especially given the current configuration of
college athletics, where there is no clear and definitive distinction between
the athletes in revenue generating sports and non-revenue generating sports.
Will a union be able to serve the values of both categories of college athletes?
Finally, is reducing the power and governance of the NCAA in order to submit to
another layer of governance and oversight of a union the plausible outcome? Further
grassroots efforts should be directed at gaining a greater voice within the
NCAA governing structure and making demands, by any means necessary, for long
term health benefits, time to achieve a quality academic experience, and equitable
economic compensation based on cost-of-living basic expenses.
