Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

NLRB rules that college athletes are employees

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> College Football
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Starless


Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 11119
Location: Ant-Baby Machete Squad
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:40 pm    Post subject: NLRB rules that college athletes are employees Reply with quote

https://twitter.com/insidehighered/status/826910992269471749

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/02/01/nlrb-general-counsel-says-private-college-football-players-are-employees


Last edited by Starless on Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
candyman93


Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 57386
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trump trying to win him some millennials Razz
_________________

2016 Adopt a Brownie - Joe Schoebert & Christian Kirksey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Starless


Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 11119
Location: Ant-Baby Machete Squad
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

candyman93 wrote:
Trump trying to win him some millennials Razz
Richard Griffin was appointed by Obama.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ramssuperbowl99


Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Posts: 34111
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't believe this carries any actual legal weight, it's just Griffin's opinion.
_________________

Title Town USA wrote:
Don't question Rams. He runs this place. He is The Man.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 67494
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 4:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ramssuperbowl99 wrote:
I don't believe this carries any actual legal weight, it's just Griffin's opinion.


Yes and no. It's not entitled to deference, but it does carry legal weight.

To flesh this out a bit further, Administrative Law is one of the most complex and difficult areas of law to understand. It's widely considered to be one of the most difficult law school classes (toughest exam I've taken in law school) and one of the most challenging areas to practice in. My understanding of Administrative Law comes from the class I took on it; thus, my understanding of it is imperfect (to say the least).

Reading the article, this appears to be an internal guidance document. In Administrative Law, agency decisions are given deference (usually referred to as Chevron Deference) if they meet a certain level of formality and consistency. If they're given deference, the standard of review changes from De Novo to Arbitrary and Capricious (bad if you're opposing the agency decision). The best example of something that is often given Chevron Deference is a formal rule (where the agency followed the proper procedure).

However, there are other agency decisions that do not carry force of law and fail to meet the level of formality for Chevron Deference. One such thing is an agency guidance document. These sort of decisions are often given Skidmore Respect (also called Mead Deference). The basic gist here is that the standard of review doesn't really change. The judge will look at the document and decide based on the processes that went into it and the reasoning in it how much evidentiary weight to give it.

As I stated earlier, based on my reading of the article, this appears to be a guidance document. Thus, it is given evidentiary weight. It just won't be given Chevron Deference and does not carry the force of law. It's essentially treated as an expert opinion. It's significant but not dispositive.

Anyways, getting away from the evidentiary issue here, this document independently does carry some significant legal weight. Griffin is the General Counsel of the NLRB. Accordingly, he is the one who prosecutes unfair labor practice violations. This document is basically a warning to private schools that they can be prosecuted.(because the Board previously refused jurisdiction but did not dispose of the issue) However, it is important to keep in mind that Griffin's term ends in November. He will be replaced by someone of Trump's choosing. It's very possible that the new General Counsel will go in a completely different direction.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
freak_of_nature


Joined: 15 Oct 2012
Posts: 1501
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wouldn't it behoove the NLRB to deem more people employees than non-employees?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KC=SB 42


Joined: 13 Feb 2007
Posts: 1139
Location: Delaware/Maryland
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does this mean we get our damn NCAA games back yet Evil or Very Mad
_________________


BenderRodriguez on the sig

Mama was Terp and Pops was a Buckeye so I guess that makes me a Nutty Turtle.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 67494
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

freak_of_nature wrote:
Wouldn't it behoove the NLRB to deem more people employees than non-employees?


I don't understand the insinuation here.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ramssuperbowl99


Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Posts: 34111
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
ramssuperbowl99 wrote:
I don't believe this carries any actual legal weight, it's just Griffin's opinion.


Yes and no. It's not entitled to deference, but it does carry legal weight.

To flesh this out a bit further, Administrative Law is one of the most complex and difficult areas of law to understand. It's widely considered to be one of the most difficult law school classes (toughest exam I've taken in law school) and one of the most challenging areas to practice in. My understanding of Administrative Law comes from the class I took on it; thus, my understanding of it is imperfect (to say the least).

Reading the article, this appears to be an internal guidance document. In Administrative Law, agency decisions are given deference (usually referred to as Chevron Deference) if they meet a certain level of formality and consistency. If they're given deference, the standard of review changes from De Novo to Arbitrary and Capricious (bad if you're opposing the agency decision). The best example of something that is often given Chevron Deference is a formal rule (where the agency followed the proper procedure).

However, there are other agency decisions that do not carry force of law and fail to meet the level of formality for Chevron Deference. One such thing is an agency guidance document. These sort of decisions are often given Skidmore Respect (also called Mead Deference). The basic gist here is that the standard of review doesn't really change. The judge will look at the document and decide based on the processes that went into it and the reasoning in it how much evidentiary weight to give it.

As I stated earlier, based on my reading of the article, this appears to be a guidance document. Thus, it is given evidentiary weight. It just won't be given Chevron Deference and does not carry the force of law. It's essentially treated as an expert opinion. It's significant but not dispositive.

Anyways, getting away from the evidentiary issue here, this document independently does carry some significant legal weight. Griffin is the General Counsel of the NLRB. Accordingly, he is the one who prosecutes unfair labor practice violations. This document is basically a warning to private schools that they can be prosecuted.(because the Board previously refused jurisdiction but did not dispose of the issue) However, it is important to keep in mind that Griffin's term ends in November. He will be replaced by someone of Trump's choosing. It's very possible that the new General Counsel will go in a completely different direction.
Thanks for the explanation - that's the most convoluted system imaginable. Laughing
_________________

Title Town USA wrote:
Don't question Rams. He runs this place. He is The Man.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ramssuperbowl99


Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Posts: 34111
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
freak_of_nature wrote:
Wouldn't it behoove the NLRB to deem more people employees than non-employees?


I don't understand the insinuation here.
He's saying this would let the government collect taxes on the wages they earn.
_________________

Title Town USA wrote:
Don't question Rams. He runs this place. He is The Man.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MSURacerDT55


Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 7407
Location: 8 mile by way of St. Clair E.99
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll be expecting my check in the mail...
_________________
@CoachHam6455
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 67494
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ramssuperbowl99 wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
ramssuperbowl99 wrote:
I don't believe this carries any actual legal weight, it's just Griffin's opinion.


Yes and no. It's not entitled to deference, but it does carry legal weight.

To flesh this out a bit further, Administrative Law is one of the most complex and difficult areas of law to understand. It's widely considered to be one of the most difficult law school classes (toughest exam I've taken in law school) and one of the most challenging areas to practice in. My understanding of Administrative Law comes from the class I took on it; thus, my understanding of it is imperfect (to say the least).

Reading the article, this appears to be an internal guidance document. In Administrative Law, agency decisions are given deference (usually referred to as Chevron Deference) if they meet a certain level of formality and consistency. If they're given deference, the standard of review changes from De Novo to Arbitrary and Capricious (bad if you're opposing the agency decision). The best example of something that is often given Chevron Deference is a formal rule (where the agency followed the proper procedure).

However, there are other agency decisions that do not carry force of law and fail to meet the level of formality for Chevron Deference. One such thing is an agency guidance document. These sort of decisions are often given Skidmore Respect (also called Mead Deference). The basic gist here is that the standard of review doesn't really change. The judge will look at the document and decide based on the processes that went into it and the reasoning in it how much evidentiary weight to give it.

As I stated earlier, based on my reading of the article, this appears to be a guidance document. Thus, it is given evidentiary weight. It just won't be given Chevron Deference and does not carry the force of law. It's essentially treated as an expert opinion. It's significant but not dispositive.

Anyways, getting away from the evidentiary issue here, this document independently does carry some significant legal weight. Griffin is the General Counsel of the NLRB. Accordingly, he is the one who prosecutes unfair labor practice violations. This document is basically a warning to private schools that they can be prosecuted.(because the Board previously refused jurisdiction but did not dispose of the issue) However, it is important to keep in mind that Griffin's term ends in November. He will be replaced by someone of Trump's choosing. It's very possible that the new General Counsel will go in a completely different direction.
Thanks for the explanation - that's the most convoluted system imaginable. Laughing


Yes, it is. And I gave you the short version of it all. The case law is anything but clear, and the Supreme Court tends to contradict itself over time. Ideally, when you understand an area of law, you can see the bigger picture behind it. I've never been able to see the bigger picture with Administrative Law. It's just too murky and convoluted.

ramssuperbowl99 wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
freak_of_nature wrote:
Wouldn't it behoove the NLRB to deem more people employees than non-employees?


I don't understand the insinuation here.
He's saying this would let the government collect taxes on the wages they earn.


Those two things aren't really connected. The IRS would be the one to make that determination. The NLRB only determines who qualifies as an "employee" under the NLRA.(and is entitled to the protections of the Act)

It's one of those weird areas of Administrative Law. Agencies are given the power by Congress to interpret terms and fill gaps within the bounds of their statutory authority. The IRS has authority over the tax code. The NLRB has authority over the NLRA. Of course, Congress has the power to overrule them whenever they choose.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> College Football All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group