- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Collective bargaining and college sports
Posted on 6/9/26 at 11:12 am
Posted on 6/9/26 at 11:12 am
We are seeing more and more college football writers putting out tweets such as this:
No offense to Andy, but he doesn't fundamentally understand how difficult that would be to make happen. There are issues on the employee and employers side.
In short, the government will only certify a union for employees to collectively bargain with their government-designated employer. You can't just do it because you want to.
Are college athletes employees? I think it requires some liberal interpretation by regulators, but yes I think they can get certified as a union without much consternation (but there could be some consternation by said regulators which would cause a big mess. It's A 60/40 thing in my opinion) Might require an act of Congress to create a special circumstance.
But who is in the union? Football players? All college athletes? Does each sport certify its own union? If you swim or run track, how would you feel about that? Wouldn't you want to piggy-back on the rev sports? Of course you would. Would the rev sport athletes want that? of course they wouldn't. The litigation to figure that out could take years, and they couldn't even begin to negotiate a contract until that is resolved.
That's just on the labor side. What about management? Who is the employer?
In pro sports, because of the franchise relationship between the leagues and its teams, the government certifies the leagues to negotiate with the unions for collective bargaining. The league created the teams. In college, such a relationship does not exist. In fact, it is the other way around. The schools created the NCAA for the purposes of governance. That's all. They remain wholy seperate and independent institutions. So, by the strictest interpretation, the union would have to negotiate with each school, and that defeats the purpose of this whole thing. Can the schools grant away these rights as they grant their TV rights to conferences? I don't know, but I do know that generally the govt doesn't like people or entities granting away rights. Regulators could easily say they can't do that without an act of Congress. In fact, I think that's the likely road there. Congress would have to create a special circumstance for this.
Why would Congress do that? Congress would say that the current bill making its way through addresses most of the issues, so why go through this mess? And if that bill couldn't pass, certainly none of these could either. In short, getting to the point of being able to collectively bargain is a long bumpy and maybe unpassable road.
My whole point is that there are issues that these writers either don't understand or don't think about. If things were as simple as they make it sound, we wouldn't be in this mess.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. No offense to Andy, but he doesn't fundamentally understand how difficult that would be to make happen. There are issues on the employee and employers side.
In short, the government will only certify a union for employees to collectively bargain with their government-designated employer. You can't just do it because you want to.
Are college athletes employees? I think it requires some liberal interpretation by regulators, but yes I think they can get certified as a union without much consternation (but there could be some consternation by said regulators which would cause a big mess. It's A 60/40 thing in my opinion) Might require an act of Congress to create a special circumstance.
But who is in the union? Football players? All college athletes? Does each sport certify its own union? If you swim or run track, how would you feel about that? Wouldn't you want to piggy-back on the rev sports? Of course you would. Would the rev sport athletes want that? of course they wouldn't. The litigation to figure that out could take years, and they couldn't even begin to negotiate a contract until that is resolved.
That's just on the labor side. What about management? Who is the employer?
In pro sports, because of the franchise relationship between the leagues and its teams, the government certifies the leagues to negotiate with the unions for collective bargaining. The league created the teams. In college, such a relationship does not exist. In fact, it is the other way around. The schools created the NCAA for the purposes of governance. That's all. They remain wholy seperate and independent institutions. So, by the strictest interpretation, the union would have to negotiate with each school, and that defeats the purpose of this whole thing. Can the schools grant away these rights as they grant their TV rights to conferences? I don't know, but I do know that generally the govt doesn't like people or entities granting away rights. Regulators could easily say they can't do that without an act of Congress. In fact, I think that's the likely road there. Congress would have to create a special circumstance for this.
Why would Congress do that? Congress would say that the current bill making its way through addresses most of the issues, so why go through this mess? And if that bill couldn't pass, certainly none of these could either. In short, getting to the point of being able to collectively bargain is a long bumpy and maybe unpassable road.
My whole point is that there are issues that these writers either don't understand or don't think about. If things were as simple as they make it sound, we wouldn't be in this mess.
5
Posted on 6/9/26 at 11:25 am to bstaceyau19
I'd imagine they'd need to be employed by a larger entity than the actual schools to avoid problems with caps on state employee compensation.
Not to mention the headache that it would cause university presidents that would have to listen to faculty whine about players getting paid x as many times as faculty salaries. They already bitch about the coaches salaries, if the players were university employees it would cause a shite storm.
Not to mention the headache that it would cause university presidents that would have to listen to faculty whine about players getting paid x as many times as faculty salaries. They already bitch about the coaches salaries, if the players were university employees it would cause a shite storm.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 11:40 am to mikesliveisacheater
quote:
the players were university employees it would cause a shite storm.
In LA their salaries would probably remain confidential like they want to do it with the revenue share
And to form a college athlete union, the athletes would have to want to. They’re already getting NIL, rev share, and unlimited transfers without a union
This post was edited on 6/9/26 at 11:49 am
Posted on 6/9/26 at 11:43 am to bstaceyau19
Here’s a link to a proposed framework. It would require congressional support, plus establishing a single overriding entity for all the schools and conferences.
The congressional support would not be limited to a couple of resolutions approving everything. Congress would need to work hand in hand with schools and conferences each step of the way for it to work.
LINK
The congressional support would not be limited to a couple of resolutions approving everything. Congress would need to work hand in hand with schools and conferences each step of the way for it to work.
LINK
Posted on 6/9/26 at 12:27 pm to Ghost of Colby
Ridiculous.
The OP is completely correct in what he wrote.
There are so many problems with unionizing college football it is silly to even contemplate it.
What is even more ludicrous is to think that it is a “solution “ to all the problems. Modern unions exist to promote disharmony and grievances, then they can extract more money from BOTH the companies and the employees while claiming they are solving something.
The OP is completely correct in what he wrote.
There are so many problems with unionizing college football it is silly to even contemplate it.
What is even more ludicrous is to think that it is a “solution “ to all the problems. Modern unions exist to promote disharmony and grievances, then they can extract more money from BOTH the companies and the employees while claiming they are solving something.
This post was edited on 6/9/26 at 12:28 pm
Posted on 6/9/26 at 1:04 pm to FlyDownTheField83
quote:
There are so many problems with unionizing college football it is silly to even contemplate it.
It's just another thing that highlights just how atrocious college football reporting is. These idiots barely understand the sport of football, yet we are supposed to listen to them about complicated matters such as this? I'm no NCAA apologist, but I think some of the flak they get in the press is due to the fact that the reporters who cover college sports are stupid and ignorant and have no understanding of what goes on. And then you get BS such as this tweet and the On3 story it cites.
This post was edited on 6/9/26 at 1:05 pm
.png)
Posted on 6/9/26 at 1:07 pm to bstaceyau19
The best thing any of us can do is cut our losses and try to enjoy professional sports. Amateurism and regional ties are all that college sports has ever had to offer, and it’s broken beyond repair.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 1:11 pm to bstaceyau19
This would have been much easier to get players to agree to if the NCAA had not basically given players complete freedom to do whatever they frick they wanted to do for the past 5 years
Posted on 6/9/26 at 1:18 pm to 0
quote:
This would have been much easier to get players to agree to if the NCAA had not basically given players complete freedom to do whatever they frick they wanted to do for the past 5 years
No it wouldn't. That doesn't address the problems. That's the same "they should collectively bargain because they want to" error that the media is making. Go ask real union people what it's like trying to organize a non-union industry. Or even trying to organize a non-union company in an industry that is very union. It's a holy mess. This is 1000 times worse because there is no real employer-employee relationship in the traditional sense.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 1:24 pm to bstaceyau19
Agree with everything you said. Also how do you organize “labor” that turns over every 4-5 years? All the different sports, men & women etc have different budgets and needs. Then factor in conferences, different states being right to work etc, it’s not possible to unionize college athletes.
When you take the money & tv out of it, college sports themselves exist as an extracurricular activity, they are not a profession that you do for a portion of your working life.
When you take the money & tv out of it, college sports themselves exist as an extracurricular activity, they are not a profession that you do for a portion of your working life.
Posted on 6/9/26 at 1:33 pm to ChanceOfRainIsNever
quote:
Agree with everything you said. Also how do you organize “labor” that turns over every 4-5 years? All the different sports, men & women etc have different budgets and needs. Then factor in conferences, different states being right to work etc, it’s not possible to unionize college athletes.
The turnover in membership is not a problem; the pro sports unions have shown that. However, the disparity in sports you mentioned is a huge issue. And we have seen that play out recently and not in labor's favor.
The screen actor's and screen writer's guild strikes from last year. Both were colossal failures. They got no concessions from the studios, and a lot of their members lost jobs because of the contraction in Hollywood due to the strikes. One of the big issues is in those 2 unions, some members are multi-millionaires several times over, but many of the members have to work 2-3 minimum wage jobs to make ends meet. A union cannot possibly adequately represent both demographics, but in those cases they try, and we saw how thatturned out.
This post was edited on 6/9/26 at 1:34 pm
Posted on 6/9/26 at 2:34 pm to ChanceOfRainIsNever
quote:
they are not a profession that you do for a portion of your working life.
But it is a portion of a football player’s working life. The hits, the wear and tear on their bodies is real. The NFL doesn’t allow them for a few years so they’re basically forced to participate in college football. Your talent can be overwhelming but they’ll still take it as a negative if you didn’t play their game in college football.
This post was edited on 6/9/26 at 2:37 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News