not at Michigan. Mo question they have a massive football basketball presense.
College Football Players Are Employees and Entitled to Union Representation
- Thread starter Bonestorm
- Start date
Well, your incorrect "I would imagine"s and "I think"s are so compelling that I don't bother trying.
I don't think that is necessarily so. The buzzwords being throw around in this thread are "equitably" and "proportionately." I don't see how it is in any way inequitable for athletes that generate revenues to be paid while althetes that don't generate revenues are not paid. Using the proportionality guide, if programs were provided sums for distribution to their athletes in proportion to the revenues the programs generate, how is that inequitable?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Kind of like in business... those that generate revenues get paid a lot and those that don't generate revenue are not paid. Right? It would work something like that?
Of course, determining who exactly generates revenues in a firm is a tricky proposition. Sales guys? Engineers? Developers? Manufacturers? Paper-pushers? Bean-counters?
cawacko
Well-known member
I'm not smart enough to fully understand all the implications of how unionization and title ix could be at crossroads but I've read a handful of articles that have said it will have to be hashed out and there will be title ix challenges/lawsuits.
SI: We’ve talked before about Title IX implications. What happens if the bargaining unit is ruled to be just football players, who are male athletes?
MM: That’s a great question. If it’s only football players, and those players negotiate contracts in which they’re paid something, then there will be female athletes and attorneys undoubtedly arguing that this is a violation of Title IX. Even though Northwestern is complying with one area of law — labor law — it would be in violation of another area of law: Title IX. There would likely be a Title IX challenge forthcoming. The size of the bargaining unit could play a big role here. If it doesn’t include female athletes, a Title IX challenge will likely occur pretty soon.
http://college-football.si.com/2014/03/26/northwestern-nlrb-union-kain-colter/
Yes, there will be challenges and lawsuits, but I don't think its necessarily a foregone conclusion that paying football players will result in an actual Title IX violation. I also don't undertnad the argument that the size of the bargaining unit will necessarily lead to Title IX problems. The bargaining unit just determines which "employees" can unionize. If the bargaining unit votes to unionize and then in the collective bargaining process obtains benefits, the universtiy will have to take measures to ensure that it does not run afould of proportionality and equitable considetations. I see no reason why a universtiy could not do that.
Taft2016
Verified User
... and there it is. What I've been saying from the onset.
Taft2016
Verified User
You can blather all you care to, but I'm the one who introduced the spectre of Title IX into a discussion you started without a notion of its importance.
And Title IX will clearly play a key role in how this issue progresses moves forward, despite your obvious ignorance of it.
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
So, in the months leading up to bankruptcy, a company can just quit making payroll because employees are now worthless?
I was talking about the Title IX requirements for the proportional and equitable distribution of resources and how it could play out if players were paid. So I don't see how your question is remotely relevant.
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
Distributing resources unequally is unequal. There's a concept...
And that'd be a great point if equal, as opposed to equitable, distribution of resouces was the relevant metric. But it's not.
I suppose here's the part where you post a clever gif.
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
No, I don't have the patience on a phone, and that's more your thing. Besides, defining what equitable means is hazy. The talentless Northwestern football team will argue it's about revenue.