Summary Of Courts And The Future Of Athletic Labor In College Sports

759 Words4 Pages

The article “Courts and the Future of ‘Athletic Labor’ in College Sports” by Michael H. LeRoy (a professor at the school of labor and employment relations, and college of law, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), is written in regards to the way athletes are treated and compensation in which examples of previous court cases are used to justify how athlete benefits may be changing sooner than thought. LeRoy uses pathos to draw out and capture an emotional appeal by using examples to validate his reasoning which is obvious within the body of his text where he discusses constitutional rights, academics, discrimination and antitrust in detail. In his first paragraph over constitutional rights, LeRoy first discusses the importance of case …show more content…

LeRoy ends the article with what three specific future scenarios for the NCAA might look like. First, a set quote over the NCAA rules that specifically define student athletes as amateur and who are considered ineligible for compensation due to them playing sports. Second, recognizing that some Division I student–athletes are employees, and so should be allowed to vote for union representation. Lastly, if it gets to the point, allowing student athletes to pressure their schools by boycotts, pickets, and other protests which is allowed under labor law. According to LeRoy, there is no reasonable way to predict how courts will ultimately decide on these matters— noting that the third scenario about student boycott scenario is merely hypothetical —and if the NCAA or schools will respond like many employers who try to get a court in to the situation to ensure that nothing is done illegally or no one is being given less or more then they deserve. “In other words, litigation is, by itself, a useful pressure tactic for student athletes.” (LeRoy). He ends the paragraph confidently, that no matter, what if there is any development that favors these student athletes, in any of the scenarios discussed, will put pressure on the NCAA to make smarter and more significant changes that respond to a players’

Open Document