This article is written by Allen R. Sanderson, an economics professor at The University of Chicago, and John J. Siegfried, an economics professor at Vanderbilt University. As shown by their job descriptions, this article by Sanderson and Siegfried is going to help me delve into the economic standpoint regarding the payment of college athletes. In addition to this, the authors discuss this topic from the perspective of the student athlete. When discussing this topic, most people seem to be in agreement that it would definitely benefit all of the players if they got paid, but Sanderson and Siegfried present a different idea. "Not all
Division I football or men’s basketball players currently are exploited. The star quarterback, running back, or wide receiver, or the high-scoring shooting guard or 7-foot shot-blocking center would clearly be paid more in a competitive market for college athletics talent. But a bench warmer might be paid less" (129). In other words, the players that spend their careers as back-ups may lose in this situation because teams may not be willing to give them compensation that would exceed the benefits they are already receiving. College athletes are already receiving scholarships valuing upwards of $50,000, while the top players may receive more than that the lesser players may receive less, so if the college does not offer them a scholarship in addition to their compensation, then they are actually losing money in this ordeal. Players may also lose out in the end because their athletic organization ends up losing money. Sanderson and Siegfried explain: "In a free market for labor, universities would compete against each otherfor the services of new high school graduate athletes. With many universities and many high school graduates, such a market could be workably competitive. The
result would be a competitive wage paid for player skills and probably a much reduced surplus earned by college athletic departments" (124). With some athletic departments already in the red, introducing the practice of bidding for top-name athletes could run these teams into bankruptcy. Another discussion topic that slips under the radar is the employment laws. If college athletes were to be paid they would have to be considered employees and labor laws must be applied to employees: "Because Division I athletes have historically been considered “students” rather than employees, they are not covered by labor laws, are not eligible for workers compensation, and cannot bargain collectively via union representation" (124). There are few activities in the world today that render more injuries than sports, so paying players workers' compensation and also allowing them to unionize could spell trouble for the NCAA and the schools it represents.
Key Terms:
Labor Union: An organization of workers that seek to protect and further their rights in their particular fields.
Workers' Compensation: A form of insurance that provides wage replacement for those injured on the job.
 |
| Allen R. Sanderson |
No comments:
Post a Comment