Early last year, I posted an article about several Northwestern University football players argued they were "employees" and sought to unionize. (College Football Players: Student Athletes & Now Union Members?). As things developed, the Chicago district of the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") ruled in March of 2014 that the student athletes qualified as "employees" and therefore were allowed to unionize. (College Football Players Given Green Light to Unionize). Unsurprisingly, Northwestern University filed a brief with the National Labor Relations Board in D.C. and asked the Board to overturn the decision from the NLRB's Chicago Regional Director. (Northwestern University Files Its Brief to Contest Initial NLRB Decision). However, the Northwestern football team conducted a vote in April of 2014 on whether to unionize. The results of that vote were sealed until the outcome of the NLRB matter was resolved.
And now, many, many months later, we have a ruling from the NLRB on the matter. Earlier this morning, the NLRB unanimously decided not to rule on the Northwestern union case and dismissed the petition. In doing so, the NLRB's decision to overturn the March 2014 ruling that allowed the football players to unionize ended the 18 month long movement for these players. Interestingly, the Board reached its decision by declining jurisdiction on the grounds that "Asserting jurisdiction would not promoted labor stability due to the nature of NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS). By statute, the Board does not have jurisdiction over state-run colleges and universities, which constitute 108 of the roughly 125 FBS teams." Had the
Note, the Board's ruling cannot be appealed and the votes case by the Northwestern football players last April will not be counted. Many others, including myself, find this ruling to be somewhat surprising. The NLRB is made up primarily of President Obama's appointees and is considered liberal and union-friendly. (Especially over the past few months as several union-friendly rulings have been made by the Board). A ruling that would have upheld the Chicago Regional Director's decision would not have been surprising...if anything, it was somewhat expected.
Readers should note, however, that the Board also stated in its ruling that "This decision is narrowly focused to apply only to the players in this case and does not preclude reconsideration of this issue in the future." As a result, it is important to consider what this ruling did NOT do: The Board did not determine whether the players were "employees" under that National Labor Relations Act. Therefore, the door was left open as to whether other college athletes could qualify as "employees" and win the right to unionize. By skirting the issue and only focusing on the jurisdiction matter, the NLRB did not delve into the more pressing matters that this case presented.
At this point, this is the end of the road for these Northwestern football players...while there are no unionization petitions active in college football at this time, something tells me this is not the last we will hear of college football players attempting to unionize.
A copy of the NLRB's ruling can be found here: apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4581d7160d
For additional information: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/08/17/northwestern-union-vote-nlrb-football/31647545/
And now, many, many months later, we have a ruling from the NLRB on the matter. Earlier this morning, the NLRB unanimously decided not to rule on the Northwestern union case and dismissed the petition. In doing so, the NLRB's decision to overturn the March 2014 ruling that allowed the football players to unionize ended the 18 month long movement for these players. Interestingly, the Board reached its decision by declining jurisdiction on the grounds that "Asserting jurisdiction would not promoted labor stability due to the nature of NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS). By statute, the Board does not have jurisdiction over state-run colleges and universities, which constitute 108 of the roughly 125 FBS teams." Had the
Note, the Board's ruling cannot be appealed and the votes case by the Northwestern football players last April will not be counted. Many others, including myself, find this ruling to be somewhat surprising. The NLRB is made up primarily of President Obama's appointees and is considered liberal and union-friendly. (Especially over the past few months as several union-friendly rulings have been made by the Board). A ruling that would have upheld the Chicago Regional Director's decision would not have been surprising...if anything, it was somewhat expected.
Readers should note, however, that the Board also stated in its ruling that "This decision is narrowly focused to apply only to the players in this case and does not preclude reconsideration of this issue in the future." As a result, it is important to consider what this ruling did NOT do: The Board did not determine whether the players were "employees" under that National Labor Relations Act. Therefore, the door was left open as to whether other college athletes could qualify as "employees" and win the right to unionize. By skirting the issue and only focusing on the jurisdiction matter, the NLRB did not delve into the more pressing matters that this case presented.
At this point, this is the end of the road for these Northwestern football players...while there are no unionization petitions active in college football at this time, something tells me this is not the last we will hear of college football players attempting to unionize.
A copy of the NLRB's ruling can be found here: apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d4581d7160d
For additional information: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/08/17/northwestern-union-vote-nlrb-football/31647545/
Comments
Post a Comment