Northwestern football players can unionize, NLRB rules

[NCBull]

So if students are defined as employees, would they be able to be "fired" after a poor season? Or just for not being good enough? As it stands right now, if they keep their academic standing they're almost guaranteed a free four-year ride.

[Apis Bull]

 

 

 

As a long time union supporter, member, and current union representative, I disagree with this ruling. Students are not employees and therefore do not have the right to unionize. More than likely this will get overturned in a higher court.

 

They do revenue creating work, which students don't. They basically are considered unpaid temps, a segment of society that has recently become the focus of attention for what many consider unfair treatment.

There are plenty of students that do revenue creating work and don't get paid. A lot of research work is done by unpaid students.

 

 

 

The research work I've seen students do is grunt work, the counting, classifying, etc. that could be done by someone making minimum wage. I was just watching a show on oysters and if they grow faster in a predator free environment and there were the student researchers, laying out the controls. The professors usually do all the heavy mental lifting.

 

 

What they do isn't really relevant, their work creates revenue for the university in the form of research grants.

[slick1ru2]

So if students are defined as employees, would they be able to be "fired" after a poor season? Or just for not being good enough? As it stands right now, if they keep their academic standing they're almost guaranteed a free four-year ride.

 

If you read the ruling it said the only reason they got scholarships was because of athletic ability, not anything they did academically in high school. And if you saw the Epix documentary Schooled, you'd see what happens when players drop down the depth chart or get a serious injury, they are booted out even if doing well in school. All this points to the facade of "student-athlete".

[slick1ru2]

 

 

 

 

As a long time union supporter, member, and current union representative, I disagree with this ruling. Students are not employees and therefore do not have the right to unionize. More than likely this will get overturned in a higher court.

 

They do revenue creating work, which students don't. They basically are considered unpaid temps, a segment of society that has recently become the focus of attention for what many consider unfair treatment.

There are plenty of students that do revenue creating work and don't get paid. A lot of research work is done by unpaid students.

 

 

 

The research work I've seen students do is grunt work, the counting, classifying, etc. that could be done by someone making minimum wage. I was just watching a show on oysters and if they grow faster in a predator free environment and there were the student researchers, laying out the controls. The professors usually do all the heavy mental lifting.

 

 

What they do isn't really relevant, their work creates revenue for the university in the form of research grants.

 

 

Its labor and I think they get a wage for it. Its not them doing the breakthrough, they are being directed by the professors whose ideas they are following. A student assistant didn't cure Polio or HIV. They may have spun test tubes.

[slick1ru2]

Bottom line is the NCAA or college sports is virtually the ONLY route to the NFL. So if someone is great in high school, doesn't want to go to college, he is practically forced to do it. So while in college they produce massive revenues for school. They deserve much more, what they are doing on the field has nothing to do with education and all about money.

[NCBull]

So if students are defined as employees, would they be able to be "fired" after a poor season? Or just for not being good enough? As it stands right now, if they keep their academic standing they're almost guaranteed a free four-year ride.

If you read the ruling it said the only reason they got scholarships was because of athletic ability, not anything they did academically in high school. And if you saw the Epix documentary Schooled, you'd see what happens when players drop down the depth chart or get a serious injury, they are booted out even if doing well in school. All this points to the facade of "student-athlete".

I don't think this answers my question at all.

[CousinRicky]

So if students are defined as employees, would they be able to be "fired" after a poor season? Or just for not being good enough? As it stands right now, if they keep their academic standing they're almost guaranteed a free four-year ride.

 

An excellent point.  And schools that don't have as much money will carry smaller rosters thus not allowing some of the borderline athletes to get a free education.  Or schools dropping football altogether.  What happens with D2 schools?  Big Butt can of worms as someone said earlier.

[Apis Bull]

 

 

 

 

 

As a long time union supporter, member, and current union representative, I disagree with this ruling. Students are not employees and therefore do not have the right to unionize. More than likely this will get overturned in a higher court.

 

They do revenue creating work, which students don't. They basically are considered unpaid temps, a segment of society that has recently become the focus of attention for what many consider unfair treatment.

There are plenty of students that do revenue creating work and don't get paid. A lot of research work is done by unpaid students.

 

 

 

The research work I've seen students do is grunt work, the counting, classifying, etc. that could be done by someone making minimum wage. I was just watching a show on oysters and if they grow faster in a predator free environment and there were the student researchers, laying out the controls. The professors usually do all the heavy mental lifting.

 

 

What they do isn't really relevant, their work creates revenue for the university in the form of research grants.

 

 

Its labor and I think they get a wage for it. Its not them doing the breakthrough, they are being directed by the professors whose ideas they are following. A student assistant didn't cure Polio or HIV. They may have spun test tubes.

 

 

Again, it doesn't matter in what capacity they are being used, their contribution, no matter how small, help secure the revenue.  Some may get a wage, but many, if not most, do not.

[charsibb]

Bottom line is the NCAA or college sports is virtually the ONLY route to the NFL. So if someone is great in high school, doesn't want to go to college, he is practically forced to do it. So while in college they produce massive revenues for school. They deserve much more, what they are doing on the field has nothing to do with education and all about money.

 

OMFG, you're talking about 1% of 1%.

 

You don't set policy to deal with the tip of the tail of the distribution.  The ones that get to the NFL will make money in the NFL. 99.9% of the college players NEVER play pro sports.

 

But they DO get a free college education.

 

Here's a solution. Pay the star football players, then charge them full tuition. Sorted.

[NCBull]

Bottom line is the NCAA or college sports is virtually the ONLY route to the NFL. So if someone is great in high school, doesn't want to go to college, he is practically forced to do it. So while in college they produce massive revenues for school. They deserve much more, what they are doing on the field has nothing to do with education and all about money.

OMFG, you're talking about 1% of 1%.

You don't set policy to deal with the tip of the tail of the distribution. The ones that get to the NFL will make money in the NFL. 99.9% of the college players NEVER play pro sports.

But they DO get a free college education.

Here's a solution. Pay the star football players, then charge them full tuition. Sorted.

It really is this simple. Nicely put.