Why Antitrust, Not Unionization, is the Answer to Underpayment of Student-Athletes

Authors

Evan NelsonFollow

Abstract

This Comment examines whether student-athletes should be allowed to unionize and collectively bargain for their rights and will present a legal argument against the unionization of student-athletes. The reasoning behind this argument is that student-athletes are not employees, and therefore, are not able to unionize. Even if student-athletes were categorized as employees, they would struggle to collectively bargain for their rights due to various states’ laws that prohibit public employees from unionizing. Rather, this Comment argues that the answer to solving college athlete underpayment is through the remedies that can be provided in antitrust law. The reasoning behind this argument is that student-athletes are independent contractors, and revenue-generating college athletics programs are guilty of price-fixing the cost of labor for these student-athletes’ services.

Recommended Citation

Evan Nelson, Why Antitrust, Not Unionization, is the Answer to Underpayment of Student-Athletes, 10 Emory Corp. Governance & Accountability Rev. 145 (2022).
Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/ecgar/vol10/iss1/5