Rob commented about the second possibility: "Well presumably that's the point: if they were treated as employees under FLSA, they'd have to be paid. I imagine FLSA was chosen specifically so they'd have to be paid hourly, as opposed to assume profit-sharing mechanism."
Okay. I admit I know nothing about sports. Does that mean that they are already sharing profits? Or is that just a possibility, an alternative to a salary? I still have to admit, in either case, it's not terribly interesting compared to the issues of free speech that NSDA could be addressing with a better version of the first rez. This article, by the way, is a good analysis of the free speech problem overall: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/09/flip-flopping-on-free-speech
In other words, I guess I think that understanding freedom of speech, and arguing about it, is a way better use of high school brains than the issue of paying a handful of athletes. These kids are heading to college soon. What are they going to see there? What are they going to learn there?
What are they going to think there?
2 comments:
The second topic has indeed come up due to an attempt by Northwestern University (among others) athletes to unionize.The argument has been made (and is probably a truism, from where I sit, for football and men's basketball anyway) that athletes are really employees far more than students, and more so than most. In addition to salaries, there have been a good number of cases of athletes losing their scholarships upon injury, choice of physician, new coaches, choice of major or choice of place of residence.
The NCAA is unpopular enough this may come to the World of Entertainment. Seeing some modern-day ripped-from-the novels Chip Hilton as a later career Clarence Darrow might ring the Academy running however. IF someone takes the idea, remember me in your Oscar acceptence Speech.
For this vote, , the NCAA has so much lucre filthy and otherwise that one might suggest that advocating the second resolution would be a case area for advocating the first resolution. So win-win.
OMG college athlete tes get SUCH a raw deal.. They have virtually no rights to their own images as college athletes in perpetuity (which are sold to purveyors of merchandise and sports video game producers at will). They have remarkably little educational agency because they can't take anything that conflicts with their athletic schedules (so often no lab sciences). And if they experience a career-ending injury they almost universally lose their scholarships.
College sports are such a scam and there is very little in place to protect the rights of the student athletes, who do all the work and have only very tenuous rights to an education as a result, and no additional remuneration.
/college professor rant
(Albeit at a D3!)
Post a Comment