For years, many have advocated that participation in college athletics is “work” and, consequently, college athletes should be treated as “employees” of the schools they attend under federal and state labor and employment laws. That advocacy has become more full-throated with the ever-increasing commercialization of college sports, especially during the past five years in which college athletes have been allowed to unlock and earn money on their name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights. In full transparency, this author has questioned the push to make student-athletes employees.
Advocates for employee status of college athletes cite a variety of factors, often in relation to applicable legal tests (e.g., economic realities or control test), including supervision and control by coaches (and conversely the athletes’ lack of control over their own schedules and lives), the benefit to the schools from athletic participation (e.g., ticket and television revenue and more school applicants), and the commercial asphyxiation of amateurism and education. But if that makes college athletes employees, what about high school athletes? All these same factors appear to apply similarly to high school athletes. Yet, we have not heard any government agency or prosecutor proclaim that, by calling their athletes “student-athletes,” high schools are violating labor law (as seen at the collegiate level).
Many will explain this away, arguing that there is so much money in college sports now that...
This Alert provides a summary and takeaways from the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) recent announcement of False Claims Act (FCA) recoveries for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025. FY 2025 saw record-breakin...