Three athletes whose lawsuits have led to the NCAA's pending $2.8 billion antitrust settlement are calling for major structural changes beyond those established by the pending settlement, including allowing college athletes to bargain collectively through an independent players association.
The three athletes — Grant House, Sedona Prince and Nya Harrison — issued their request in a Dec. 2 letter to U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, who is overseeing the settlement.
Although the letter praises the terms of the agreement, House, Prince and Harrison warned that without player representation in negotiations with their schools and conferences, athletes would “inevitably remain in a vulnerable position” and the industry would remain mired in “ongoing litigation.” . They asked that the court “give the go-ahead” to the athletes' efforts to bargain collectively in the future through a players' association.
The NCAA and its schools remain adamantly opposed to athletes being viewed as employees, which is often necessary for legally binding collective bargaining agreements. Judge Wilken is unlikely to play any role in the formation or blessing of a players' association, but the athletes' letter could have an impact on how she views the long-term success of the agreement.
Jeffrey Kessler, an attorney representing plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit, told ESPN that he does not believe the letter, which was provided to ESPN by Athletes.org, a year-old group that tries to organize college athletes and defending them on your behalf will derail the process.
University officials are lobbying Congress for legislation to prevent athletes from being considered employees and forming unions, while multiple attempts to unionize athletes move through the court system.
A hearing to grant final approval to the agreement is scheduled for early April.
The athletes, all three plaintiffs in antitrust cases included in the settlement, shared their concerns in the letter to Wilken.
“We need a players association,” the players wrote.
House, Prince and Harrison are all members of Athletes.org, which is among several fledgling organizations hoping to provide formal representation to athletes in the future, even if the NCAA prevents athletes from unionizing.
Wilken gave preliminary approval in September to a settlement in the House v. NCAA that would pay approximately $2.8 billion in damages to former athletes and establish a new system for schools to directly pay their athletes starting next year. Under the terms of the 10-year agreement, each school could allocate more than $20 million per year for athlete compensation, a figure that is expected to increase annually.
House, Prince and Harrison wrote that they still support the terms of the agreement and see it as “an important step forward,” but their letter presages the next front in an ongoing battle to professionalize college sports, rather than a sustained peace that many in Hope for the college sports industry will come from this expensive deal.
Kessler, co-lead counsel for all Division I athletes in the class-action lawsuits, told ESPN that the athletes had informed Wilken of the letter and said he had no problem with his decision.
“I think the deal is incredible for college sports, but it doesn't solve all the problems in the world,” Kessler said. “The fact that they also need a players' association is a valid argument. I have no problem with that.”
The NCAA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Leaders of the NCAA and its most powerful conferences have said they are optimistic that the deal, combined with proposed federal legislation that gives them some protection against future antitrust lawsuits, would help schools regain some control over the sports industry. university students.
The agreement includes provisions that would limit how much each team could pay its athletes and restrict boosters from paying players more as a recruiting incentive, which athletic directors and conference commissioners say is necessary to maintain competitive balance.
In professional sports, those types of limits are negotiated between leagues and a players' association through collective bargaining agreements. House, Prince and Harrison wrote that any future system for college sports that does not give athletes a substantial voice in the decision-making process will surely produce more court fights.
“While professional leagues include athletes in these decisions through their respective players' associations, the university system continues to prevent our players' association from representing us at the decision-making tables,” they wrote.
Wilken is not required to respond to the athletes, but their concerns could inform whether she decides to give final approval to the deal. A group of state lawmakers also publicly expressed concerns last week about how the deal clashed with laws they themselves wrote on the rights of college athletes to earn money in their states.
Athletes and other parties can file formal objections to the terms of the agreement until the end of January.
