- Joined
- May 8, 2002
- Posts
- 1,258,503
- Reaction score
- 59
The latest turn in the legal fight for recognition of college athletes as employees who can form unions is taking place out west, with members of the Oregon State women’s basketball team on Friday filing a petition for union representation with the state’s Employment Relations Board.
The development is legally important for at least two reasons.
More from Sportico.com
First, it’s the first time a group of female college athletes has formally sought recognition as a players’ union. The Oregon State players’ effort is occurring as women’s college sports continues to grow and become more popular with fans, and 54 years after Title IX became law.
However, it’s not the first time female college athletes have sought recognition as employees.
In 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied Penn track and field athletes Gillian Berger and Taylor Hennig recognition as employees within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which guarantees minimum wage. Berger and Hennig came up short in part because their athletic participation was deemed too closely tied to their educational experience and amateur status.
Second, Oregon State is a public university, which has major significance from a labor and employment law perspective. It means that the relevant laws and adjudicating bodies that will determine if the women’s basketball team can become union members are state, not federal.
That’s a key difference from efforts by football players at Northwestern in the mid-2010s to gain employment recognition and by men’s basketball players at Dartmouth earlier this decade to form a union. Those players were students at private universities, so whether they were employees and could unionize was a question of federal law, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), officials at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and, potentially, federal courts.
The Dartmouth players made history by becoming the first certified bargaining unit in college sports. They not only voted to unionize, but also won the election and their unit was certified by the NLRB. Yet the players withdrew their election petition at the end of 2024, at least in part because of concerns a favorable decision by NLRB regional director Laura Sacks might not have survived review by the agency board, which was expected to be reshaped by the incoming Trump administration.
The Oregon State matter will be determined by the Oregon Employment Relations Board, which would oversee an election by the players. Decisions by the board can be challenged in Oregon courts.
OSU athletic department representatives did not respond to a request for comment. The school is contractually bound by membership obligations in the Pac-12 and the NCAA, which means it can’t pay players for their labor and remain in compliance with conference and NCAA rules. This was a potential conundrum for Dartmouth given its membership in the Ivy League and the NCAA, and could become one for OSU too.
The basketball team’s petition was made through the United College Athletes Association (UCAA), a union whose mission is to represent college athletes “as humans, students and workers through collective bargaining.” That objective is not just about access to pay, but also other employment benefits, such as health care, leave, access to wellness programs and various other benefits enjoyed by OSU employees. OSU is no stranger to collective bargaining, either, as its faculty and staff are unionized.
UCAA says the players’ organizing effort began two years ago, when more than 100 college women’s basketball players requested collective bargaining with the Big Ten and SEC. Those requests were rebuffed.
The idea of a conference collectively bargaining with athletes from schools in the conference is noteworthy. One hurdle for collective bargaining at individual schools is that, within a conference, usually some are public and others are private, and as noted above, that means a very different legal process on whether the athletes are employees and can unionize. In fact, in some states, public university employees are prohibited or greatly limited in bargaining, while in others, the opposite is true.
But a conference is private, and thus governed by federal labor law, and could theoretically function as a multi-employer bargaining unit on behalf of member schools. That topic was explored in Sportico’s recent story on Stanford football players forming a fraternity with the College Football Players Association and the aspiration of it eventually leading to conference-wide collective bargaining.
A key advocate of conference-wide collective bargaining is former NLRB general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, who in 2021 argued that college athletes are employees and should be able to unionize.
Abruzzo is now a UCAA advisor and, in a statement on Friday, said, “The NCAA and its members should not get a bailout that prevents a true path for these vulnerable workers,” adding that “the labor movement must unify around the right approach to make sure that college athletes enjoy robust collective bargaining rights.”
OSU went 23–12 in 2025–26, playing a second season in the West Coast Conference while the Pac-12 re-formed. Scott Rueck has coached the team since 2010, leading it to a Pac-12 championship and Final Four berth in 2016.
Rueck signed a contract extension in 2022 that will see him earn $1.05 million in 2026–27.
The 2024–25 Beavers made the Elite Eight before losing their top six scorers in the transfer portal that offseason.
Senior Jenna Villa, a member of the UCAA’s 10-person interim executive committee, will return this season, having led OSU in scoring during the 2025–26 campaign after transferring from Washington State.
The OSU effort is occurring as Congress struggles to pass federal legislation that would grant the NCAA and member schools limited antitrust immunity to enforce the House v. NCAA settlement, eligibility and transfer rules, and revenue-sharing opportunities. The latest leading bill, the Protect College Sports Act, might not get a vote before the Senate goes on recess and faces a legislative schedule that is limited as the November midterm election approaches. Dozens of college sports reform bills have been introduced in Congress since 2021 and each one has failed to advance.
But in a world where college athletes engage in collective bargaining with their school (and/or conference and the NCAA), negotiated rules related to wages, hours, and other conditions, including transfer and eligibility, would be exempt from antitrust scrutiny. That’s through the nonstatutory labor exemption, which reflects a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions.
There are practical hurdles to that idea, including whether the bargaining unit would consist of athletes from a team, or athletes from different teams at the same school, or a conference-wide entity on behalf of a sport or different sports.
To date, colleges, conferences and the NCAA have been opposed to recognition of college athletes as employees, let alone union members. That opposition is under attack in Johnson v. NCAA, where the athletes argue they are student workers, much like their classmates who are in Work Study, and should be paid at least minimum wage.
Best of Sportico.com
Sign up for Sportico's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Continue reading...
The development is legally important for at least two reasons.
More from Sportico.com
- Banks Are Rushing to Grab College Sports' Newest Ad Space
- Sporticast: FIFA's Investment Plan, Explained
- JPMorgan's Ohio State Deal Shows Evolution of College Sports
First, it’s the first time a group of female college athletes has formally sought recognition as a players’ union. The Oregon State players’ effort is occurring as women’s college sports continues to grow and become more popular with fans, and 54 years after Title IX became law.
However, it’s not the first time female college athletes have sought recognition as employees.
In 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied Penn track and field athletes Gillian Berger and Taylor Hennig recognition as employees within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which guarantees minimum wage. Berger and Hennig came up short in part because their athletic participation was deemed too closely tied to their educational experience and amateur status.
Second, Oregon State is a public university, which has major significance from a labor and employment law perspective. It means that the relevant laws and adjudicating bodies that will determine if the women’s basketball team can become union members are state, not federal.
That’s a key difference from efforts by football players at Northwestern in the mid-2010s to gain employment recognition and by men’s basketball players at Dartmouth earlier this decade to form a union. Those players were students at private universities, so whether they were employees and could unionize was a question of federal law, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), officials at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and, potentially, federal courts.
The Dartmouth players made history by becoming the first certified bargaining unit in college sports. They not only voted to unionize, but also won the election and their unit was certified by the NLRB. Yet the players withdrew their election petition at the end of 2024, at least in part because of concerns a favorable decision by NLRB regional director Laura Sacks might not have survived review by the agency board, which was expected to be reshaped by the incoming Trump administration.
The Oregon State matter will be determined by the Oregon Employment Relations Board, which would oversee an election by the players. Decisions by the board can be challenged in Oregon courts.
OSU athletic department representatives did not respond to a request for comment. The school is contractually bound by membership obligations in the Pac-12 and the NCAA, which means it can’t pay players for their labor and remain in compliance with conference and NCAA rules. This was a potential conundrum for Dartmouth given its membership in the Ivy League and the NCAA, and could become one for OSU too.
The basketball team’s petition was made through the United College Athletes Association (UCAA), a union whose mission is to represent college athletes “as humans, students and workers through collective bargaining.” That objective is not just about access to pay, but also other employment benefits, such as health care, leave, access to wellness programs and various other benefits enjoyed by OSU employees. OSU is no stranger to collective bargaining, either, as its faculty and staff are unionized.
UCAA says the players’ organizing effort began two years ago, when more than 100 college women’s basketball players requested collective bargaining with the Big Ten and SEC. Those requests were rebuffed.
The idea of a conference collectively bargaining with athletes from schools in the conference is noteworthy. One hurdle for collective bargaining at individual schools is that, within a conference, usually some are public and others are private, and as noted above, that means a very different legal process on whether the athletes are employees and can unionize. In fact, in some states, public university employees are prohibited or greatly limited in bargaining, while in others, the opposite is true.
But a conference is private, and thus governed by federal labor law, and could theoretically function as a multi-employer bargaining unit on behalf of member schools. That topic was explored in Sportico’s recent story on Stanford football players forming a fraternity with the College Football Players Association and the aspiration of it eventually leading to conference-wide collective bargaining.
A key advocate of conference-wide collective bargaining is former NLRB general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, who in 2021 argued that college athletes are employees and should be able to unionize.
Abruzzo is now a UCAA advisor and, in a statement on Friday, said, “The NCAA and its members should not get a bailout that prevents a true path for these vulnerable workers,” adding that “the labor movement must unify around the right approach to make sure that college athletes enjoy robust collective bargaining rights.”
OSU went 23–12 in 2025–26, playing a second season in the West Coast Conference while the Pac-12 re-formed. Scott Rueck has coached the team since 2010, leading it to a Pac-12 championship and Final Four berth in 2016.
Rueck signed a contract extension in 2022 that will see him earn $1.05 million in 2026–27.
The 2024–25 Beavers made the Elite Eight before losing their top six scorers in the transfer portal that offseason.
Senior Jenna Villa, a member of the UCAA’s 10-person interim executive committee, will return this season, having led OSU in scoring during the 2025–26 campaign after transferring from Washington State.
The OSU effort is occurring as Congress struggles to pass federal legislation that would grant the NCAA and member schools limited antitrust immunity to enforce the House v. NCAA settlement, eligibility and transfer rules, and revenue-sharing opportunities. The latest leading bill, the Protect College Sports Act, might not get a vote before the Senate goes on recess and faces a legislative schedule that is limited as the November midterm election approaches. Dozens of college sports reform bills have been introduced in Congress since 2021 and each one has failed to advance.
But in a world where college athletes engage in collective bargaining with their school (and/or conference and the NCAA), negotiated rules related to wages, hours, and other conditions, including transfer and eligibility, would be exempt from antitrust scrutiny. That’s through the nonstatutory labor exemption, which reflects a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions.
There are practical hurdles to that idea, including whether the bargaining unit would consist of athletes from a team, or athletes from different teams at the same school, or a conference-wide entity on behalf of a sport or different sports.
To date, colleges, conferences and the NCAA have been opposed to recognition of college athletes as employees, let alone union members. That opposition is under attack in Johnson v. NCAA, where the athletes argue they are student workers, much like their classmates who are in Work Study, and should be paid at least minimum wage.
Best of Sportico.com
Sign up for Sportico's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Continue reading...
