In a big step for the rights of college athletes, the Dartmouth men’s basketball team voted 13-2 Tuesday to form a union.
The historic election was the latest event to challenge the founding principles of the NCAA, which has long prided itself on protecting the concept of amateurism in college sports. Now, it appears the stage is set for a shakeup, with the NCAA embroiled in several legal battles regarding its relationship with its athletes.
While the unionization process is far from complete, Tuesday’s vote could signal a turning point as the decision reverberates across the college sports landscape.
So how did we get here, where are things and what’s next? This is what you should know.
How we got to Tuesday’s vote
The broader push for college athletes to be treated as employees has been percolating for years, but this specific effort took off last September, when 15 Dartmouth men’s basketball players filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). to unionize through a New England-based Chapter of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), a union representing approximately 2 million workers in the U.S. and Canada.
The school opposed the move, but in February, NLRB regional director Laura Sacks ruled that the players were employed and could move forward with their election to unionize.
Sacks’ ruling held that Dartmouth players are employed because they perform work that benefits the school, the school has significant control over their work, and the players receive compensation through teams, lodging, tickets and other means.
“Because Dartmouth has the right to control the work performed by the Dartmouth men’s basketball team, and the players perform that work in exchange for compensation, I find that the requested basketball players are employed within the meaning of the Act,” Sacks wrote. .
Why are Dartmouth players unionizing?
Unionization would allow players to bargain collectively with Dartmouth over wages, hours, and other policies and conditions related to the game.
Dartmouth players Cade Haskins and Romeo Myrthil, both juniors on the team, said of Tuesday’s vote: “It is clear that we, as students, can also be campus workers and union members.”
“Dartmouth seems to be stuck in the past. “It is time for the era of amateurism to end,” Haskins and Myrthil said in a statement. “We call on the Dartmouth Board of Trustees and President Beilock to live the truth of their own words and cultivate ‘brave spaces’ in which ‘changing your mind based on new evidence is a good thing.’”
They added that they wanted to “create a less exploitative business model for college sports” and would continue to talk with other Dartmouth and Ivy League athletes about forming unions and working together to advocate for athletes’ rights and well-being in the coming years. months.
Didn’t this happen at Northwestern?
In 2014, Northwestern football players also made efforts to unionize and received a similar ruling at the regional level, but their case was overturned nationally because the NLRB ruled that it could not assert its jurisdiction.
Since the NLRB only applies to the private sector, state schools are not subject to its decisions. The NLRB determined in 2015 that because Northwestern was in the Big Ten, which at the time was a conference full of state schools, a national decision on players’ ability to unionize would not promote stability in labor relations due to the variety of states. labor laws within the scope of the conference.
The key difference this time: Dartmouth is a member of the entirely private Ivy League, which won’t have the same competitive equity argument as the Big Ten.
What could Tuesday’s vote mean for college athletes beyond Dartmouth?
While Tuesday’s vote does not open the door for all other college athletes to be considered employees, it serves as an important step in one of several potential major athlete rights cases across the country.
Ace The Athletic‘s Nicole Auerbach wrote in a recent article examining the implications of athletes becoming employees: “A victory for Dartmouth’s players’ unionization efforts could motivate other private schools in conferences with more diverse membership the Ivy League, totally private, to organize.
Where else is the labor struggle taking place?
Auerbach also previously noted that the Dartmouth ruling could be cited in the various ongoing lawsuits across the country related to the status of college athletes. He noted that any of the Johnson v. NCAA (disputes whether athletes are hourly salaried employees), House v. The NCAA (fighting over back name, image and likeness payments for athletes who competed before 2021) or the NLRB case in California could disrupt the business of college athletics.
In that NLRB case in California, if an ongoing trial on an unfair labor practice charge confirms that USC, the Pac-12 and the NCAA should be considered joint employers of athletes, that could allow all college athletes to unionize , regardless of the state they are in. they live or type of school they expect.
Whats Next?
In the wake of Tuesday’s vote, Dartmouth filed a request for review by the NLRB. That review, and a possible appeal to federal court later, could mean official union recognition and collective bargaining are still months away.
Required reading
(Photo: Scott Eisen/Getty Images)
