Interesting development.

https://www.highschoolot.com/nchsaa-comm.../20839455/

Are any other states doing this?

If SCOTUS rules that athletes are employees, could this include high school athletes as well?

Where does it all end?

Was there something that actually prevented this before? I don’t understand how a HS athlete can be an employee. What are they going to get a cut of the popcorn sales lol

In an environment where "amateurs" are actually professionals being paid for their performance or participation, it will end just like any in other areas where professionals are paid.

A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

(05-03-2023 07:54 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

Yeah - it would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are employees at least in public schools. At a minimum, attendance at a neighborhood public high school isn’t ever contingent on playing on an athletic team, whereas an athletic scholarship to a Division I school is directly contingent on staying on that athletic team. It might be getting into more of an employment risk for IMG or private schools that engage in college-like athletic recruiting.

(05-03-2023 08:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 07:54 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

Yeah - it would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are students at least in public schools. At a minimum, attendance at a neighborhood public high school isn’t ever contingent on playing on an athletic team, whereas an athletic scholarship to a Division I school is directly contingent on staying on that athletic team. It might be getting into more of an employment risk for IMG or private schools that engage in college-like athletic recruiting.

Did you mean this?
'It would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are employees, at least in public schools.'

(05-03-2023 07:29 AM)esayem Wrote:  Was there something that actually prevented this before? I don’t understand how a HS athlete can be an employee. What are they going to get a cut of the popcorn sales lol

Hotdog sales too. Hotdogs are big sellers on Friday nights at high stadiums.

Public schools maybe not, but what about the small subset of private schools that are traveling athletics teams with teachers?

(05-03-2023 08:18 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 08:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 07:54 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

Yeah - it would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are students at least in public schools. At a minimum, attendance at a neighborhood public high school isn’t ever contingent on playing on an athletic team, whereas an athletic scholarship to a Division I school is directly contingent on staying on that athletic team. It might be getting into more of an employment risk for IMG or private schools that engage in college-like athletic recruiting.

Did you mean this?
'It would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are employees, at least in public schools.'

Ha! Yes! Bad iPhone typing there.

(05-03-2023 08:39 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 08:18 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 08:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 07:54 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

Yeah - it would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are students at least in public schools. At a minimum, attendance at a neighborhood public high school isn’t ever contingent on playing on an athletic team, whereas an athletic scholarship to a Division I school is directly contingent on staying on that athletic team. It might be getting into more of an employment risk for IMG or private schools that engage in college-like athletic recruiting.

Did you mean this?
'It would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are employees, at least in public schools.'

Ha! Yes! Bad iPhone typing there.

No problem. It's true enough of some high school students as typed.

You touch on something here that will be interesting to watch as colleges sort out legalities. How will a school's public or private status complicate things?

(05-03-2023 07:29 AM)esayem Wrote:  Was there something that actually prevented this before?

5 years ago, a high school athlete signing an endorsement deal would have nuked his NCAA eligibility from orbit. (Or her).

Quote:I don’t understand how a HS athlete can be an employee.

Yeah, that part doesn't seem applicable.

But if we're not talking about normal schools, but about the IMG Academies of the world, then there might be a case to be made there.

Quote:What are they going to get a cut of the popcorn sales lol

(05-03-2023 07:54 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

I wonder if zero marketability applies to Texas HS football players.

They are also minors.

(05-03-2023 08:52 AM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  They are also minors.

So were Drew Barrymore and Macaulay Culkin once.

They still got paid.

(05-03-2023 07:54 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

I don't think that a typical college athlete passes an employment control test, either. However, the fooball teams, and some of the basketball teams, generate so much revenue these days that the NCAA's archaic system was no longer adequate to describe what they really are. Ideally, Congress would step in and help to define things, but that seems quite unlikely.

(05-03-2023 08:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 07:54 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

Yeah - it would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are employees at least in public schools. At a minimum, attendance at a neighborhood public high school isn’t ever contingent on playing on an athletic team, whereas an athletic scholarship to a Division I school is directly contingent on staying on that athletic team. It might be getting into more of an employment risk for IMG or private schools that engage in college-like athletic recruiting.

Any school that offers a sports scholarship, college or HS, would have to be considered exactly the same if you're going to claim that athletes are employees. A public high school that doesn't offer athletic scholarships, or an Ivy League school that also doesn't offer athletic scholarships, should be exempt from this, but there's a very real chance that we're going to see 14 year old freshmen at IMG Academy classified as employees in a few years.

(05-03-2023 08:22 AM)panite Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 07:29 AM)esayem Wrote:  Was there something that actually prevented this before? I don’t understand how a HS athlete can be an employee. What are they going to get a cut of the popcorn sales lol

Hotdog sales too. Hotdogs are big sellers on Friday nights at high stadiums.

So the high school quarterback can have his pic plastered everywhere with the "Eat my weenie!" slogan?

LOL I can't imagine Child Labor laws applying to a football practice.

Don't exceed 15 hours per week...

For some kids the football facilities are a safe haven from being in the streets. Kids hang around the gym and practice fields all day when they aren't in school. I can't imagine being like, where's your punch card, you're out of time get out of here.

(05-03-2023 08:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 07:54 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

Yeah - it would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are students at least in public schools. At a minimum, attendance at a neighborhood public high school isn’t ever contingent on playing on an athletic team, whereas an athletic scholarship to a Division I school is directly contingent on staying on that athletic team. It might be getting into more of an employment risk for IMG or private schools that engage in college-like athletic recruiting.

There are some private schools (mainly boarding schools) that require their students to participate in a school-sponsored sport of some type so yes, there could be an issue when it comes to "control". I imagine that they would simply adjust their policies accordingly in the event that high school athletes were ever found to be employees.

NIL is a completely separate issue (from employment) and I don't see how you can keep athletes from receiving such deals. Also, I am not so sure that you can limit what products they are allowed to endorse; I will be interested to see if any challenges to this provision are brought forth. Are we going to tell HS kids that they can't work at the local grocery store or operate a small business of their choice (such as a YouTube channel)? Of course not and the same idea applies to athletes.

One thing I think that you could see happen is that a NIL Collective of (insert various college programs) starts paying athletes to sponsor their collective while they are still in HS; again, I don't see how this would be found to be illegal or how it could legally be stopped.

After thinking about the issue more, it's highly doubtful that conferences will ever choose to "employ" athletes as well, for a myriad of reasons related to the complexities of the issue: of particular note, should conferences ever employ athletes at all of a conference's programs there will be questions about the nature of the competition between the various member schools: is the game rigged or are the players (and coaches) fighting for the best outcome for their individual program? Also, who is in "control"? The program's coaches or the conference? Who is responsible for making the employment decisions, etc? What about recruiting (or a HS draft) and budgets? There are just too many issues to work out for such an idea to be feasible.

As I have stated on numerous occasions, athletes will never be employees of an individual state.

The only way to ever have athletes be considered to be employees is for schools (of all types) to divorce themselves from their athletic departments. In lieu of an athletic department, I suppose schools could have branding agents tasked with the job of licensing-out their name for use by whatever private entity is the highest bidder... but even then there are numerous issues that would have to be resolved.

It's not going to happen. Even if I am wrong (which I doubt) and Johnson results in all athletes being found to be employees all that will occur is that the vast majority of programs will shutter entirely and that those choosing to participate in the new model will ultimately choose to do the same in the long run.

(05-03-2023 08:58 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 08:02 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-03-2023 07:54 AM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  A *lot* of states allow HS athletes to sign NIL deals, and as more states (especially in the South) revamp their state NIL laws, it will only become more common. Of course, HS athletes have almost zero marketability outside of seniors signing bagman deals.

Whether an athlete is an employee or not is less about the revenue generated and more about control exerted by the school. I think it would be pretty difficult to argue that a typical HS athlete passes the employment control test that a D-I athlete does, but perhaps some lawyer will try at a place like IMG.

Yeah - it would be extremely difficult to claim that high school athletes are employees at least in public schools. At a minimum, attendance at a neighborhood public high school isn’t ever contingent on playing on an athletic team, whereas an athletic scholarship to a Division I school is directly contingent on staying on that athletic team. It might be getting into more of an employment risk for IMG or private schools that engage in college-like athletic recruiting.

Any school that offers a sports scholarship, college or HS, would have to be considered exactly the same if you're going to claim that athletes are employees. A public high school that doesn't offer athletic scholarships, or an Ivy League school that also doesn't offer athletic scholarships, should be exempt from this, but there's a very real chance that we're going to see 14 year old freshmen at IMG Academy classified as employees in a few years.

"IMG Academy" is an interesting mention. I am aware of these types of schools but really don't know much about them. I take it that they offer some sort of education, are accredited and do a good enough job to get kids into school, correct?

In short, what do they do? I will have to look this up.