Page 8 of 21 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 210
  1. #71
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    Quote Originally Posted by sirthought View Post
    I think if this were to sway the requirements of universities paying scholarship students for basketball, then you'd have to be looking at every scholarship journalist that writes for the newspaper or student run TV station, every musician that's playing university concerts, or every scientist that's doing work on behalf of a research project.

    All of that collective training and controlled life experience would become too expensive and we'll have to end the notion of public education.
    At most of the schools I've been at, these are all paid positions. Granted, they're not paid as much as a key player in a revenue sport at a big time program would likely be paid, but the marching band and pep bands are paid for each performance. The people who work at the TV and radio stations, and those who work for the university newspaper are also all paid something. At the very least, there is no agreed upon rule amongst universities to not pay them. They can if they want to. I'm sure not all schools pay those positions, but a lot of them do. That's actually one of the main arguments people who are in favor of paying college players are making.
    Last edited by xubrew; 09-16-2019 at 02:44 PM.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  2. #72
    Junior sirthought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NKY
    Posts
    2,774
    As a person who was a college journalist, musician, and research lab tech, I got nadda.

    Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

  3. #73
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    Quote Originally Posted by sirthought View Post
    As a person who was a college journalist, musician, and research lab tech, I got nadda.

    Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
    Sounds like you had the same fair market value as me.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  4. #74
    Supporting Member waggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Gold Country
    Posts
    11,298
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    Virtually anyone who works without a contract is an at-will employee, and nearly everyone who is employed can seek out opportunities to work elsewhere.

    If the NCAA just keeps telling themselves that student athletes are not employees and just ignores things like this, then I think they are in big trouble. The problem is that I think that’s exactly what the NCAA will do. .

    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/...-are-employees
    Yeah the NLRB's function isn't to decide what or who is an employee. Their role is to defend actual employees.

  5. #75
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    Quote Originally Posted by waggy View Post
    Yeah the NLRB's function isn't to decide what or who is an employee. Their role is to defend actual employees.
    Yeah, and they have to know who is and isn't an employee in order to do that. They've stated that they are committed to protecting college athletes' employee rights under the labor laws.

    The more you try to point out that the NCAA isn't in any real trouble, the more trouble I start to think they may be in.
    Last edited by xubrew; 09-16-2019 at 05:51 PM.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  6. #76
    Supporting Member waggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Gold Country
    Posts
    11,298
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    Yeah, and they have to know who is and isn't an employee in order to do that. They've stated that they are committed to protecting college athletes' employee rights under the labor laws.

    The more you try to point out that the NCAA isn't in any real trouble, the more trouble I start to think they may be in.

    They're not employees. Good grief. The NLRB doesn't get to define what an employee is. Well I guess they can, but they only have power with regards to actual employees. They can call lab rats employees too, but it would just be another waste of taxpayer dollars.

  7. #77
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    Quote Originally Posted by waggy View Post
    They're not employees. Good grief. The NLRB doesn't get to define what an employee is. Well I guess they can, but they only have power with regards to actual employees. They can call lab rats employees too, but it would just be another waste of taxpayer dollars.
    Can you explain why they're not employees?? Maybe you can. If so, then I'll gladly tip my hat to you.

    You're probably going to see a lot of arguments being made that they are employees because they perform work, they do so under the control of someone else, and the work they perform benefits the people/organization that controls them. An argument can be made that they're not, but is it good enough to win and is the NCAA smart enough to make it?? Earlier you mentioned that no one is forcing them to play. That doesn't mean they don't legally fit the definition of an employee. It just means that they aren't incarcerated.

    Can you explain why the NLRB has stated that they are committed to protecting the employee rights of student-athletes if it's not their decision to make in the first place?? You say they don't get to decide. Well, in the case of college athletes they apparently did.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  8. #78
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    2,111
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    Can you explain why they're not employees?? Maybe you can. If so, then I'll gladly tip my hat to you.

    You're probably going to see a lot of arguments being made that they are employees because they perform work, they do so under the control of someone else, and the work they perform benefits the people/organization that controls them. An argument can be made that they're not, but is it good enough to win and is the NCAA smart enough to make it?? Earlier you mentioned that no one is forcing them to play. That doesn't mean they don't legally fit the definition of an employee. It just means that they aren't incarcerated.

    Can you explain why the NLRB has stated that they are committed to protecting the employee rights of student-athletes if it's not their decision to make in the first place?? You say they don't get to decide. Well, in the case of college athletes they apparently did.
    wouldn't the argument simply be that they're students first when enrolled at the university and the athletics merely constitute an extra-curricular? i don't think that'd be a difficult argument

  9. #79
    Supporting Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,984
    Quote Originally Posted by sirthought View Post
    As a person who was a college journalist, musician, and research lab tech, I got nadda.

    Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
    But you were free to freelance and book gigs without your college interfering.
    "If our season was based on A-10 awards, there’d be a lot of empty space up in the rafters of the Cintas Center." - Chris Mack

  10. #80
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    Quote Originally Posted by scoscox View Post
    wouldn't the argument simply be that they're students first when enrolled at the university and the athletics merely constitute an extra-curricular? i don't think that'd be a difficult argument
    I don’t think it’s quite that easy because being a student doesn’t necessarily mean they’re not employees. Student workers are employees. Grad assistants are oftentimes employees. RAs and oftentimes those in Student government are also paid.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •