dib Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Pay them. The end. 1. They go to school for free 2. They have free tutors 3. Training table is better than anything the average student gets to eat, even though the "student athlete" is not supposed to be afforded anything the average student has available to them. 4. Where does the money come from that pays for the tats, the Oakleys and the gold? 5. They are given 'jobs' I'm sure they're already being paid. And don't give me that argument "They're bringing in money for the university" Of course they are and so are the students that have to pay tuition. The majority of these athletes wouldn't even be attending college if it weren't for their athletics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Easy solution: Remove the academic requirement. The school can just make them standard employees. Farm teams for the NFL. Just take away the pretense that they're students. Everyone knows it's a lie. Why are we even pretending? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 It will be fun when they find out that, if college-athletes are employees, that scholarships and related items can then be classified as "income" and "benefits", making them subject to federal and state income taxes. Also, by having "income", this makes these students ineligible for other financial aid such as Pell Grants. I'm sure they'd have no problem finding some union-sympathetic politicians to waive away those little inconsistencies. They are just kids after all!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 It will be fun when they find out that, if college-athletes are employees, that scholarships and related items can then be classified as "income" and "benefits", making them subject to federal and state income taxes. Also, by having "income", this makes these students ineligible for other financial aid such as Pell Grants. Start saving the receipts form Sports Authority. This would be great. Better accounting. Then there is the side for deductions, like the job expenses. I wonder how much they spend on equipment and clothing... That stuff gets pretty expensive, I am sure the lesser student athletes have to shell out a lot of personal expenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dib Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Start saving the receipts form Sports Authority. This would be great. Better accounting. Then there is the side for deductions, like the job expenses. I wonder how much they spend on equipment and clothing... That stuff gets pretty expensive, I am sure the lesser student athletes have to shell out a lot of personal expenses. They don't spend anything on equipment, Club teams may have to buy their own gear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure this is not strictly about getting paid. It is more about the atletes having some sort of say in things like having access to medical care after playing days for injuries that occured while playing and things like that. Make no mistake, compensation is imporatnt, but believe there is a larger issue. Bigger question to me i, will scholarships become taxable if people also get paid and get other rights afforded "employees"? As this is focused right now on on private institutions, we are prolly talking annual values of close to $60K...figure if a 5 year value of $300K needs to get taxed, that might be a lot bigger nut than the money a 2nd string Right Guard would make at Northwestern. Be careful what you wish for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 They don't spend anything on equipment... I see some universities don't spend anything on equipment either: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/10/21/gram-o21.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 So would graduation become a "termination of employment," or "retirement?" What happens when a students' union decides that they're due "unemployment" or "retirement" benefits, and go on strike for them? What's a school going to do then? How's the NLRB going to rule on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 So would graduation become a "termination of employment," or "retirement?" What happens when a students' union decides that they're due "unemployment" or "retirement" benefits, and go on strike for them? What's a school going to do then? How's the NLRB going to rule on that? Temporary employment not to exceed 48 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 (edited) So if the unionized scholarship athletes strike, and the walk-ons understandably want their best chance to actually play, are the walk-ons scabs? That's gotta be great for team unity. http://www.faegrebd.com/21351 Conversely, the NLRB held that the "walk-on" players; those who do not receive scholarships; are not employees. The reasoning behind that determination was that since the walk-ons do not sign a tender, do not receive compensation for the athletic services that they provide, and are free from many of the severe restrictions that scholarship players are subject to, there is no basis to consider them employees for purposes of the Act. Full text of the NLRB ruling: http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-nlrb-northwestern-football-union-ruling-20140326,0,2025939.htmlpage Edited April 2, 2014 by ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 So if the unionized scholarship athletes strike, and the walk-ons understandably want their best chance to actually play, are the walk-ons scabs? That's gotta be great for team unity. http://www.faegrebd.com/21351 Full text of the NLRB ruling: http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-nlrb-northwestern-football-union-ruling-20140326,0,2025939.htmlpage strange, the NW players that spoke on it focused on it all being about healthcare and taking care of safety - so the scout team is just meat for the wolves at practice, not part of the team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 strange, the NW players that spoke on it focused on it all being about healthcare and taking care of safety - so the scout team is just meat for the wolves at practice, not part of the team? They're starting to sound like union members already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted April 2, 2014 Author Share Posted April 2, 2014 strange, the NW players that spoke on it focused on it all being about healthcare and taking care of safety - so the scout team is just meat for the wolves at practice, not part of the team? They still receive access and free usage of exercise equipment, training staff, tutors, and other perks. Maybe once this happens those students will be charged to get those services. So if the unionized scholarship athletes strike, and the walk-ons understandably want their best chance to actually play, are the walk-ons scabs? That's gotta be great for team unity. http://www.faegrebd.com/21351 Full text of the NLRB ruling: http://www.chicagotr...025939.htmlpage I hope they go thru with this and Northwestern just cuts the football team as a result. It's beyond ridiculous. Throw those kids out of school, do the whole works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 So if the unionized scholarship athletes strike, and the walk-ons understandably want their best chance to actually play, are the walk-ons scabs? That's gotta be great for team unity. http://www.faegrebd.com/21351 Full text of the NLRB ruling: http://www.chicagotr...025939.htmlpage That is a weak decision. Referring to the Brown case, which makes the specific distinction that students are "admitted" and not "hired." and which overturned a previous NYU decision that said otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 They still receive access and free usage of exercise equipment, training staff, tutors, and other perks. Maybe once this happens those students will be charged to get those services. I hope they go thru with this and Northwestern just cuts the football team as a result. It's beyond ridiculous. Throw those kids out of school, do the whole works. I hope so too... I want to see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 That is a weak decision. Referring to the Brown case, which makes the specific distinction that students are "admitted" and not "hired." and which overturned a previous NYU decision that said otherwise? Actually the Brown case involved graduate assistants whose work revolved around their academic function. The description of expectations for sholar-athlete football players describes a pretty miserable work existence. Much more employee than student. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts