The recent withdrawal of two high-profile cases—the Dartmouth men’s basketball players’ petition and the National College Players Association (NCPA) unfair labor practice charge regarding USC athletes—might appear to be setbacks in the movement to recognize college athletes as employees. However, these decisions are more about strategic maneuvering in the face of shifting political landscapes than a retreat on the merits of the argument.
What’s Behind These Moves?
On December 31, 2024, Dartmouth players and SEIU Local 560 withdrew their NLRB petition. With the incoming administration and a Republican-majority NLRB board, the risk of setting an adverse precedent increased. A loss could have impacted similar organizing efforts across the country.
The NCPA’s withdrawal reflects a pivot to new opportunities for athlete compensation. These include proposed settlements in antitrust cases (House, Carter, Hubbard), which would compensate Division I athletes for their contributions to media rights, ticket sales, sponsorships, and NIL.
These withdrawals are tactical, not a reflection of weaker arguments. If anything, the legal foundation for recognizing college athletes as employees has only grown stronger as college sports become increasingly commercialized.
Key Legal Arguments
1️⃣ Work-for-Pay Relationship: NLRB rulings, such as the one by Regional Director Laura Sacks in the Dartmouth case, recognize that college athletes perform work (training, games, promotional appearances) in exchange for compensation like scholarships, stipends, and other benefits. These meet the definition of “wages” under the law.
2️⃣ Employer Control: Schools and athletic conferences set athletes’ schedules, dictate practice and game times, and even monitor their social media use. This level of control mirrors that of a traditional employer-employee relationship.
3️⃣ Judicial Backing: In NCAA v. Alston, the Supreme Court rejected the NCAA’s amateurism arguments, with Justice Kavanaugh noting the exploitative logic of denying athletes pay under the guise of preserving amateurism.
Other Efforts to Watch
📃 Litigation: The Johnson v. NCAA case under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is moving forward in favor of athletes. Courts have affirmed that athletes can simultaneously be students and employees, paving the way for recognition through wage-and-hour laws.
🗳️ State-Level Action: States may lead the way in recognizing college athletes as employees, much like they did with NIL rights. Public universities, governed by state labor laws, could become focal points for athlete organizing efforts.
🗣️ Advocacy Groups: Organizations like the College Basketball Players Association (CBPA) continue to file charges and push for recognition, emphasizing the economic realities of college sports.
The Bigger Picture
The debate is far from over. Political outcomes may slow progress, but they don’t diminish the strength of the legal argument. The commercialization of college sports has created a billion-dollar industry, and athletes are at the center of it. Whether recognition happens through litigation, state legislation, or organizing efforts, the push for recognition is far from over.
What do you think? Should college athletes be recognized as employees? Is there a better path forward?