PHILADELPHIA — College athletes whose efforts primarily benefit their schools can qualify as employees eligible for pay under federal wage-and-hour laws, a U.S. appeals court told the NCAA on Thursday. The verdict was delivered with a shock.
The court, in the latest challenge to the NCAA’s long-standing notion of “amateurism” in college sports, ruled that a test should be developed to distinguish between students who play college sports for recreation and those who do not. The efforts “cross the legal line in action.”
US Circuit Judge L. Felipe Restrepo wrote, “With the most obvious indicators of professional athletes, playing sports can certainly be compensable work.” “Ultimately, the test is whether the cumulative circumstances of the relationship between the athlete and the college or NCAA reveal an economic reality that is that of an employee-employer.”
A colleague, while agreeing, questioned the difficulty of such a process, given that approximately 200,000 students compete on approximately 6,700 Division I teams. The NCAA had hoped the case would be dismissed, but instead it would go back to the trial judge for fact finding.
The decision follows a 2021 Supreme Court decision that caused the NCAA to amend its rules to limit athletes from profiting from their name, image and likeness. In May, the NCAA announced a nearly $2.8 billion revenue-sharing plan that could provide millions of dollars directly to athletes over the next year.
Division I athletes and former athletes in Philadelphia are demanding more modest hourly wages similar to those earned by their peers in work-study programs. He argues that colleges are violating fair labor practices by failing to pay him for the time he devotes to his sports, which he says can average 30 or more hours per week.
Paul McDonald, the attorney representing the plaintiffs, has suggested that athletes could earn $2,000 per month or $10,000 per year for attending NCAA games. He said that many students need money for daily expenses.
“The notion that college athletes can’t be both students and employees is not accurate when you have student employees on campus,” McDonald said Thursday. “It is beyond belief, the idea that athletes would not meet the same standards as employees.”
The Indianapolis-based NCAA asked the appeals court to stop hearing the case after a district judge refused to dismiss the case.
The defendants include the NCAA and member schools including Duke University, Villanova University and the University of Oregon.
The NCAA said in a statement that it is expanding key benefits for athletes, from health care to career preparation, and wants to help schools offer more direct financial benefits to their athletes.
However, it noted students’ concerns that the employment model “could harm their experiences and unnecessarily lose the opportunities of countless student-athletes in women’s sports, Olympic sports, and games at the HBCU and Division II and Division III levels.” Could.” The statement was issued by NCAA spokesperson Meghan Durham Wright.
The unanimous Supreme Court decision gave rise to zero payments and removed restrictions on college compensation beyond full-ride scholarships. Schools recruiting top athletes can now offer thousands of dollars in education-related benefits such as study abroad programs, computers, and graduate scholarships.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred, writing, “Traditions alone cannot justify the NCAA’s decision to create a massive money-raising enterprise on the backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated.” “The NCAA is not above the law.”
But that case did not resolve whether college athletes are employees entitled to direct pay — the main issue before the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court panel.
Baylor University President Linda Livingstone, speaking at the NCAA conference last year, said the model would turn coaches into bosses of their players.
“Turning student-athletes into employees would have a sweeping, staggering and potentially devastating impact on college sports,” said Livingstone, chair of the NCAA Board of Governors. “We need Congress to reaffirm the unique relationship student-athletes have with their universities.”
But the relationship has faced increasing scrutiny.
In 2021, a top lawyer for the National Labor Relations Board said in a memo that college athletes should be treated as school employees.
And players have taken to social media to demand a cut of some of the millions of dollars NCAA schools make on sports, including a campaign on the eve of the 2021 NCAA basketball tournament that ran the hashtag #NotNCAAProperty .
The NCAA compared athletes in its conference to students who perform in theater groups, orchestras and other campus activities without pay.
McDonald stated that these types of campus groups are student led, while athletes’ time is controlled by their coaches in a manner similar to employment.
“The most controlled kids on any campus are student-athletes,” he said earlier this year.
Discover more from news2source
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
