Congressional Bill Would Prevent Student Athletes Being Employees

WASHINGTON — A U.S. House committee approved a bill Thursday that would prevent student athletes from being categorized as employees of their universities.

A National Labor Relations Board judge ruled in February that student athletes were university employees, thereby allowing them to earn salaries and to unionize to protect their rights as workers.

The bill approved by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce would reverse the NLRB decision.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Bob Good, R-Va., said the classification as employees would block students from some benefits, such as receiving compensation for commercial use of their names and images as well as the ability to transfer schools without losing eligibility.

Both the NLRB and the House committee are trying to protect student athletes but disagree on the technique.

Good said that few college athletes become successful in professional sports, meaning they need to depend on their education to help them reach their career goals.

“University or conference employment status would take the focus off their education and have unintended negative consequences,” Good said.

The classification as employees also could extend union influence too far over universities, he said.

Good was a wrestler for Liberty University when it was a National Collegiate Athletic Association Division II school and later worked as an administrator in its athletics department.

Democrats argue employment status for student athletes protects them from abuses that have included requiring them to spend so much time on sports that their grades suffer. Meanwhile, their teams and schools reap sometimes huge revenue from the multi-billion dollar college sports industry.

In the Senate, negotiations continue over a more comprehensive college sports bill. 

The legislative proposals are taking on greater urgency after a $2.8 billion lawsuit settlement three weeks ago between the NCAA and the Power Five college sports conference. The settlement is awaiting court approval.

It would provide billions of dollars in revenue-sharing payments to current and former athletes, including shares of sponsorship revenue. It also would fundamentally change how college athletes are compensated.

The dispute over the best method for protecting the interests of student athletes dates from a landmark 2021 Supreme Court ruling in National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston. The court said NCAA restrictions on education benefits for players violate the nation’s antitrust laws.

The decision opened the doors for college athletes to profit from personal endorsements and sponsorships. Until then, the NCAA banned its athletes from independent contracts to make money.

Even among the athletes, opinions are deeply split.

On March 5, Dartmouth College basketball players voted to unionize while invoking their new rights conveyed by the NLRB. The college refuses to bargain with them.

Ivy League schools, with support from many of their athletes, took a different course little more than a month later.

On April 23, the schools filed an amicus brief to challenge the NLRB ruling. They argued that employee status for athletes “could threaten the continued existence of intercollegiate sports in athletic conferences, like the Ivy League.”

The College Football Players Association is trying to find a middle ground for agreement. It sent representatives to meet with lawmakers in Washington, D.C., last month to develop new legislation.

They want a law that would grant them worker protections but that would prevent limitations on their private contracts if they are classified as employees.

You can reach us at [email protected] and follow us on Facebook and Twitter