In a significant development for college athletes, a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional official ruled on Monday that basketball players at Dartmouth College are employees of the institution. This landmark decision paves the way for the creation of the first-ever labor union for NCAA athletes. All 15 members of the Dartmouth men's basketball team had signed a petition in September to join the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 560, which already represents some employees at the Ivy League school.
Unionizing would give the players the opportunity to negotiate not only their salaries but also their working conditions, including practice hours and travel arrangements. NLRB Regional Director Laura Sacks wrote in her ruling that since Dartmouth has the right to control the work performed by the basketball team, and the players receive compensation for their performance, they meet the definition of employees under the National Labor Relations Act.
The Dartmouth basketball player representatives, Cade Haskins and Romeo Myrthil, expressed their excitement about the ruling, stating that it is a significant step forward for college athletes. They also announced plans to form the Ivy League Players Association for basketball players across the league, aiming to advocate for athletes' rights and well-being while creating a platform for collaborative decision-making. The representatives believe that other athletes will be inspired by this decision and choose to join the association.
The ruling has ignited a debate within the NCAA and universities across the country, as they have consistently maintained that their athletes are students rather than employees. College sports leaders have been actively lobbying Congress for a federal law that would solidify the student-athlete classification. The NCAA currently faces a federal lawsuit in Pennsylvania on this very issue. However, the SEIU, which petitioned on behalf of Dartmouth's basketball players, remains in full support of the unionization effort.
The outcome of this case holds immense significance, considering the multiple legal challenges being mounted against the NCAA's amateur athlete model. Gabe Feldman, a sports law professor at Tulane University, noted that this ruling could be the first step towards recognizing college athletes as employees. It sets a precedent that could have far-reaching implications on the broader landscape of college sports.
Dartmouth can still challenge the regional director's decision by appealing to the national board. This situation mirrors a similar case that occurred in 2014 when members of the Northwestern University football team sought to unionize. In that instance, the ballots were impounded pending a ruling, and an election could only be held once the appeal process was complete. The Northwestern football players' union election did not address the question of whether the players were employees. All eight Ivy League schools are private institutions, and as they do not offer athletic scholarships, legal experts suggest that there is a possibility that the full board will uphold the regional director's ruling.
However, concerns have been raised about the potential implications of recognizing college athletes as employees. For instance, does this mean that other students involved in activities like music should also be considered employees? There is an ongoing complaint in California that argues football and basketball players at the University of Southern California should be classified as employees of the school, the Pac-12 Conference, and the NCAA. The hearing for this case will resume later this month.
The NLRB's top lawyer, Jennifer Abruzzo, highlighted in a 2021 memo that college athletes should be considered employees. She compared their engagements in far-reaching and lucrative business enterprises to professional athletes who are employed by teams to play a sport. This perspective challenges the traditional notion of collegiate sports as purely amateur endeavors.
During the hearing, Dartmouth presented arguments against considering their basketball players as employees, stating that athletics are an integral part of the school's academic mission. They equated participation in sports to activities like performing in the orchestra or playing club sports, emphasizing that students' primary objective at Dartmouth is learning. The college also claimed that the men's basketball program operates at a financial loss. However, the players' attorneys contested the school's financial figures, asserting that the basketball team brings in lucrative revenue streams that were not properly accounted for. They stressed that what matters is not whether the program makes a profit but whether it generates revenue and whether coaches have control over the players.
The NCAA's amateurism-based collegiate sports model is facing substantial challenges on multiple fronts. Apart from the NLRB ruling, the NCAA is contending with at least six antitrust lawsuits, with one recently filed by attorneys general from Tennessee and Virginia that questions how recruits can be compensated for their name, image, and likeness rights. The Supreme Court ruling in 2021 opened the door for college athletes to receive additional forms of compensation, leading the NCAA to revise its rules accordingly.
This latest ruling is seen as another step toward allowing college athletes to receive fair compensation and have a voice in determining their remuneration. Major League Baseball Players Association executive director Tony Clark hailed the decision, stating that it demonstrates that college athletes are employees entitled to basic rights and fair compensation in an industry that generates billions of dollars.
As the country awaits the potential outcome of an appeal by Dartmouth, the ruling sets a precedent that could shape the future of college athletics. It challenges the longstanding amateurism model and highlights the growing push for increased rights and benefits for college athletes. The conversation surrounding the role and status of athletes in the collegiate sports industry continues to evolve, and all eyes remain on the impact of this ruling and the potential ripple effects across college sports nationwide.
