The debate over whether college athletes should be treated as employees has gained traction over the past few years, with many advocates for athlete pay arguing that the demands placed on college athletes, in terms of time and effort, are equal to or greater than the demands placed on traditional employees. As a result, the idea that the athletes whose colleges make substantial revenues off of should receive compensation beyond their scholarships has become more prevalent.
In 2021, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the regulating body of athletics for hundreds of universities across the country, made a historic shift by allowing athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) that are used for different marketing endeavors such as product endorsement and autograph signings. This policy change came after years of legal fights and pressure from athletes and advocacy groups and has opened doors for athletes to sign endorsement deals, allowing them to have financial independence and financial compensation for their work. However, the NIL policy did not address the fundamental question of whether athletes should be classified as employees, which has been the focal point of recent lawsuits and state legislation.
In November 2019, a federal court ruled that athletes at NCAA Division I schools may be considered employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Mary Metcalf, LASA’s head cross-country coach whose son is a college athlete and LASA alumnus, explained the implications and effects of the ruling on students.
“If students are deemed employees, they’ll be entitled to at least minimum wage and overtime pay, and it could have massive ramifications for college athletics,” Metcalf said. “But with the new Name, Image and Likeness situation, it is the wild, wild west in college athletics.”
Many college students work jobs to pay off their college costs, and college athletes are no exception. Metcalf added that with the amount of time and effort they put into their sport, it can be difficult for them to get a job without stretching themselves out too thin, highlighting the benefit the policy would have on these athletes.
“My grandfather, who was born in the early 1900s and who spent his working years working in steel mills, was a fierce union man and an advocate for workers’ rights in general,” Metcalf said. “I can remember as a little girl hearing him arguing that college football players were being exploited by universities because they weren’t being paid for their honest day’s work. It turns out he was 40 years ahead of his time.”
Universities and the NCAA face a complex situation as they continue to navigate these challenges and questions against their current policies because many institutions worry about the financial implications and the possibility of inequality among the different sports programs. Smaller programs may struggle to provide competitive compensation, leading to a disparity between well-funded and poorly-funded athletic departments.
“The old idea of the amateur college athlete has been completely upended in schools with big athletic programs, and NIL has significantly magnified the huge inequities among colleges and their athletic programs,” Metcalf said.
Some recruits might be deterred by the increased pressure and professional expectations that come with being classified as an employee. The commitment to balancing academics, athletics, and employment could be very overwhelming for some students. Additionally, the potential disparities in compensation between athletes in high-revenue sports and those in less popular ones might create a competitive imbalance, influencing a recruit’s decision on where to play.
Despite these concerns, the movement toward treating college athletes as employees continues to gain momentum. Proponents argue that this change would provide athletes with protection and benefits such as health insurance and the right to negotiate working conditions, aligning their reward and treatment to match their contribution to collegiate sports.
This has significant implications for high school recruits and whether or not they choose to take an athletic path. For many high school athletes, the prospect of being treated as an employee with financial compensation and employment benefits could be a strong incentive. Metcalf learned more about the system when her son Philip received preferential admission to Vanderbilt University, which participates in the Southeastern Conference (SEC), for running track and cross country, but not an athletic scholarship.
“Running competitively in the SEC had some real drawbacks for him,” Metcalf said. “The recruitment process in his case actually involved a lot of effort on his part: emailing coaches and arranging interviews with coaches and team members. There are not a lot of D1 coaches pursuing athletes. Philip also got about $6,000/semester in NIL money in addition to lots of perks, like shoes, lots of clothing, gear, and free meals in the athletes-only dining hall.”
Paying college athletes could also have drawbacks. Zade Marwan plays volleyball at the University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin) and explained his perspective on this debate.
“I don’t really think we should get paid. It’s college, later on we’ll get paid, hopefully,” Marwan said. “Other students don’t get paid for doing a computer science degree.”
Marwan also believes that athletes with a high viewership deserve some form of compensation because of the level of skill they’ve achieved. The new NIL policy allows for companies to pay athletes to sponsor their products or brand, sometimes through advertisements.
“They get sponsorships, that’s their form of payment,” Marwan said. “The companies will reach out to you, and then you’ll have to sign a contract or deal with them to support their brand and they support you.”
Competing at a high level is a dream for many high schoolers, many of which spend countless hours on their sport every week. Junior Bouna Sakho, a member of LASA’s boys soccer team, hopes to continue to pursue the sport after high school.
Sakho believes that college athletes spend so much time playing their sport that it is more like a job. Due to this, Sakho believes that college athletes should earn money for their hard work.
“I think college athletes dedicate a lot of time and energy, similar to a full-time job, so they should have access to financial benefits, like a percentage of revenue, especially since they contribute to generating that revenue,” Sakho said. “For me, it’s also important to balance this idea to keep college sports from turning into a commercial enterprises.”
While Sakho believes it would be a huge benefit for him to be treated as an employee, he is also concerned about colleges focusing less on the life and relationships of student athletes and more on revenue. As the NCAA and educational institutions grapple with these challenges, the future of college athletics remains uncertain. The decisions made in the coming years could redefine college athletics in the United States.
