(03-27-2014 12:08 AM)NolaOwl Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 04:10 PM)OwlHOG Wrote:  This is the first step in a long process. Northwestern can file a request for review by the full NLRB by April 9, but the full board may opt to let the election proceed. If the election goes forward and the vote is for a union, Northwestern can file objections to the election with the full board. Assuming those are denied, Northwestern can refuse to bargain with the union, be found in violation of sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act, and then file an appeal with either the 7th Circuit or the D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. The legal question whether student-athletes are employees under the Act would be looked at de novo by the appeals court. So, it may take years for a court to rule on whether the Regional Director's conclusion that student-athletes can organize under the National Labor Relations Act is a valid reading of the statute.

Excellent summation of the legal situation! Further, any decision of the Court of Appeals could be appealed to the Supreme Court.

As a labor lawyer, I view the Region's ruling with some alarm. If the student-athletes are employees for NLRA purposes, what about Title VII, the FLSA, ERISA, OSHA, Obamacare et al? We may be going down a slippery slope.

OwlHOG & Nola: Why does the NRLB jurisdiction not extend to public universities (many of which now get a rather small amount of their funding from their sponsoring states, just as many private universities receive large amounts of government funds, typically as academic research grants)? What organization has analogous has jurisdiction for public employee union issues?

(03-27-2014 02:26 AM)Almadenmike Wrote:  OwlHOG & Nola: Why does the NRLB jurisdiction not extend to public universities (many of which now get a rather small amount of their funding from their sponsoring states, just as many private universities receive large amounts of government funds, typically as academic research grants)? What organization has analogous has jurisdiction for public employee union issues?

According to the NYTimes: "The ruling applies only to scholarship football players at Northwestern, but the precedent could extend to other Division I scholarship football players at similar private universities. (Collective bargaining at public universities is governed by state law, not the N.L.R.B.)"

(03-26-2014 05:20 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  That's a bit like saying that someone who works a full-time job to afford his school isn't primarily a student. I think most honest people would disagree. The 'job' makes the primary goal possible. This implies that their primary goal is football.

That's exactly what the players argued and the regional director ruled. He determined players were recruited based on athletic, not academic, abilities; they spent more time practicing and playing (40-50 hours/week) than they did studying and other people do in full time jobs; and players are treated like employees with drug testing and other rules that if violated result in scholarships being revoked. The QB also testified he was discouraged from taking hard science classes that prevented him from becoming a doctor.

I know for a fact that when Todd Graham was the coach the primary goal was football.

(03-27-2014 12:21 AM)NolaOwl Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 04:43 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 04:37 PM)Houston Owl Wrote:  Interesting possibilities if players are employees. A late hit and the opposing QB tears his ACL. Clearly an action by an employee in the scope of his employment. Let the lawsuits begin.

I can see work comp coming into play but are you suggesting a lawsuit against the employer (opposing school) for injury? If so why doesn't this occur with the NFL or other pro sports with player's unions?

Hey, Tiki, such suits have happened when the intent to injure was pretty clear. Do you remember Rudy Tomjanovich's suit against Kermit Washington and the LA Lakers? The intent to injure is somewhat less clear in late hit situations.

There are provisions in the collective bargaining agreements in pre sports on how injuries are to be treated.

I do remember that but was foggy on whether the Lakers were a part of the lawsuits or it was only Washington thanks for the clarification.

Obviously basketball players at UNC weren't there for the education. Another example of the mess that was/is (?) athletic academics on Tobacco Road.

http://deadspin.com/this-unc-athletes-pa...socialflow

This was starting to break while we were in the Supers at NC State last year.

(03-27-2014 02:26 AM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-27-2014 12:08 AM)NolaOwl Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 04:10 PM)OwlHOG Wrote:  This is the first step in a long process. Northwestern can file a request for review by the full NLRB by April 9, but the full board may opt to let the election proceed. If the election goes forward and the vote is for a union, Northwestern can file objections to the election with the full board. Assuming those are denied, Northwestern can refuse to bargain with the union, be found in violation of sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act, and then file an appeal with either the 7th Circuit or the D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. The legal question whether student-athletes are employees under the Act would be looked at de novo by the appeals court. So, it may take years for a court to rule on whether the Regional Director's conclusion that student-athletes can organize under the National Labor Relations Act is a valid reading of the statute.

Excellent summation of the legal situation! Further, any decision of the Court of Appeals could be appealed to the Supreme Court.

As a labor lawyer, I view the Region's ruling with some alarm. If the student-athletes are employees for NLRA purposes, what about Title VII, the FLSA, ERISA, OSHA, Obamacare et al? We may be going down a slippery slope.

OwlHOG & Nola: Why does the NRLB jurisdiction not extend to public universities (many of which now get a rather small amount of their funding from their sponsoring states, just as many private universities receive large amounts of government funds, typically as academic research grants)? What organization has analogous has jurisdiction for public employee union issues?

Mike:

The NLRB only has jurisdiction over private employers. Public university employees, just as is the case with other state employees, only have collective bargaining rights to the extent they are granted by state law. Federal employees also have collective bargaining rights under other federal statutes.

(03-27-2014 02:26 AM)Almadenmike Wrote:  OwlHOG & Nola: Why does the NRLB jurisdiction not extend to public universities (many of which now get a rather small amount of their funding from their sponsoring states, just as many private universities receive large amounts of government funds, typically as academic research grants)? What organization has analogous has jurisdiction for public employee union issues?

(03-27-2014 07:36 AM)NicevilleWRC Wrote:  According to the NYTimes: "The ruling applies only to scholarship football players at Northwestern, but the precedent could extend to other Division I scholarship football players at similar private universities. (Collective bargaining at public universities is governed by state law, not the N.L.R.B.)"

(03-27-2014 11:43 AM)NolaOwl Wrote:  Mike: The NLRB only has jurisdiction over private employers. Public university employees, just as is the case with other state employees, only have collective bargaining rights to the extent they are granted by state law. Federal employees also have collective bargaining rights under other federal statutes.

Thanks, Niceville & Nola!

You know those Union Locals in Dallas and Fort Worth will cause trouble.

If you are a Top 5 Bluechip at your position up there you get your choice of Lexus, BMW, or Benz vehicle.

(03-27-2014 11:43 AM)NolaOwl Wrote:  

(03-27-2014 02:26 AM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-27-2014 12:08 AM)NolaOwl Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 04:10 PM)OwlHOG Wrote:  This is the first step in a long process. Northwestern can file a request for review by the full NLRB by April 9, but the full board may opt to let the election proceed. If the election goes forward and the vote is for a union, Northwestern can file objections to the election with the full board. Assuming those are denied, Northwestern can refuse to bargain with the union, be found in violation of sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act, and then file an appeal with either the 7th Circuit or the D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. The legal question whether student-athletes are employees under the Act would be looked at de novo by the appeals court. So, it may take years for a court to rule on whether the Regional Director's conclusion that student-athletes can organize under the National Labor Relations Act is a valid reading of the statute.

Excellent summation of the legal situation! Further, any decision of the Court of Appeals could be appealed to the Supreme Court.

As a labor lawyer, I view the Region's ruling with some alarm. If the student-athletes are employees for NLRA purposes, what about Title VII, the FLSA, ERISA, OSHA, Obamacare et al? We may be going down a slippery slope.

OwlHOG & Nola: Why does the NRLB jurisdiction not extend to public universities (many of which now get a rather small amount of their funding from their sponsoring states, just as many private universities receive large amounts of government funds, typically as academic research grants)? What organization has analogous has jurisdiction for public employee union issues?

Mike:

The NLRB only has jurisdiction over private employers. Public university employees, just as is the case with other state employees, only have collective bargaining rights to the extent they are granted by state law. Federal employees also have collective bargaining rights under other federal statutes.

According to the AFSCME website, the following states do not have a state-law analogue to the NLRA:
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
Colorado
Georgia
Idaho
Louisiana
Mississippi
North Carolina
North Dakota
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
West Virginia
Wyoming

In the rest of the states, I believe it is quite common for NLRB interpretations to be considered at least persuasive, if not binding, authority by the board that functions as that state's equivalent to the NLRB.

(03-28-2014 03:55 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(03-27-2014 11:43 AM)NolaOwl Wrote:  

(03-27-2014 02:26 AM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-27-2014 12:08 AM)NolaOwl Wrote:  

(03-26-2014 04:10 PM)OwlHOG Wrote:  This is the first step in a long process. Northwestern can file a request for review by the full NLRB by April 9, but the full board may opt to let the election proceed. If the election goes forward and the vote is for a union, Northwestern can file objections to the election with the full board. Assuming those are denied, Northwestern can refuse to bargain with the union, be found in violation of sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act, and then file an appeal with either the 7th Circuit or the D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. The legal question whether student-athletes are employees under the Act would be looked at de novo by the appeals court. So, it may take years for a court to rule on whether the Regional Director's conclusion that student-athletes can organize under the National Labor Relations Act is a valid reading of the statute.

Excellent summation of the legal situation! Further, any decision of the Court of Appeals could be appealed to the Supreme Court.

As a labor lawyer, I view the Region's ruling with some alarm. If the student-athletes are employees for NLRA purposes, what about Title VII, the FLSA, ERISA, OSHA, Obamacare et al? We may be going down a slippery slope.

OwlHOG & Nola: Why does the NRLB jurisdiction not extend to public universities (many of which now get a rather small amount of their funding from their sponsoring states, just as many private universities receive large amounts of government funds, typically as academic research grants)? What organization has analogous has jurisdiction for public employee union issues?

Mike:

The NLRB only has jurisdiction over private employers. Public university employees, just as is the case with other state employees, only have collective bargaining rights to the extent they are granted by state law. Federal employees also have collective bargaining rights under other federal statutes.

According to the AFSCME website, the following states do not have a state-law analogue to the NLRA:
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
Colorado
Georgia
Idaho
Louisiana
Mississippi
North Carolina
North Dakota
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
West Virginia
Wyoming

In the rest of the states, I believe it is quite common for NLRB interpretations to be considered at least persuasive, if not binding, authority by the board that functions as that state's equivalent to the NLRB.

NLRB precedents are sometimes slippery. By tradition, the five member Board consists of three members from the President's party and 2 members from the opposition. So, precedents change every few years.

Taxable Income??
As it stands now the scholarship money and the monthly stipend are not considered taxable income to the player. Under a collective bargaining agreement that money would then be considered wages/salary and be subject to Federal Income tax.
Is this a correct assumption?
If so, then the players would have to make arrangements to pay taxes on this income, which would then present a whole new set of issues for some of these kids.
The law of unintended consequences....................

(03-31-2014 09:42 AM)OklahomaOwl Wrote:  Taxable Income??
As it stands now the scholarship money and the monthly stipend are not considered taxable income to the player. Under a collective bargaining agreement that money would then be considered wages/salary and be subject to Federal Income tax.
Is this a correct assumption?
If so, then the players would have to make arrangements to pay taxes on this income, which would then present a whole new set of issues for some of these kids.
The law of unintended consequences....................

Actually, room and board and stipends are already taxable income. And the tuition-fees-books part of a scholarship is taxable income if provided in exchange for services. (See IRS Pub. 970.) There is a 1977 IRS revenue ruling that says an athletic scholarship that could not be canceled for any reason - even if the player quit the team - was not provided in exchange for services and thus was not taxable income. But since then NCAA rules have changed to permit cancellation of scholarships for various reasons, including quitting the team.

Getting around to my point, the legal underpinnings for considering athletic scholarships taxable are actually already in place. But the IRS has not taken that position to date, and I do not think it is at all a given that their position will change anytime soon. If they wanted to consider athletic scholarships income, they could have done so long before now, and they're not at all obligated to change their position because of whatever the NLRB says.

But the politics of the whole situation don't favor making taxation of athletic scholarships an enforcement priority. To put it more bluntly, no president and/or Congress is going to stand for the IRS socking thousands of already economically-disadvantaged African-American college football and basketball players with large tax bills.

So I don't think the union overlooked the potential taxation issue at all. On the contrary, I bet they thought it through thoroughly and concluded they ultimately have little to worry about. They may very well be right.

(03-27-2014 07:36 AM)NicevilleWRC Wrote:  I know for a fact that when Todd Graham was the coach the primary goal was football.

It thought the primary goal during that period was to position Toad for his next dream job?