The Instigator
Momo12345
Pro (for)
The Contender
Amphia
Con (against)

NCAA student athletes ought to be recognized as employees under the fair labor standards act.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Momo12345 has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/6/2018 Category: Economics
Updated: 1 week ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 102 times Debate No: 107637
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Momo12345

Pro

For the person accepting this debate, We will use the following format

Round one-only acceptance
round two-state your case
round three-rebuttals
round 4-conclusions (new evidence brought up in final round is not allowed)

if evidence is used please cite your sources

This will be a public forum style debate for anyone with knowledge of nsda. Thank you. And I look forward to debating.
Amphia

Con

I accept the debate resolved: NCAA student athletes ought to be recognized as employees under the fair labor standards act.

I apologize that this took so long, whenever I tried to respond the site would fail on me.
Debate Round No. 1
Momo12345

Pro

"We must ensure not only that everyone receives equal pay for equal work, but that they have the opportunity to do equal work." This quote speaks to what the PRO team advocates which is to give college athletes the payment they deserve for the work they already do. That is why my partner and I stand on the PRO side of the Resolution. Resolved: NCAA student athletes ought to be recognized as employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
To Prove the resolution I offer the following 2 contentions. Contention one:Students aren't able to get jobs because of how many hours they are playing their sports.
And Contention 2: Sport Scholarships are extremely competitive and very easy to lose.

Contention 1: Students aren"t able to get jobs because of how many hours they are playing their sports.
College athletes may not accept any form of payment
Miller; Doctoral Candidate at the United States Sports Academy; 2012 [Anthony; Contemporary
Sports Issues; NCAA Division Athletics: Amateurism and Exploitation; January 3, 2012]
In addition to assigning a fixed amount to athletic scholarships, there are additional
ways the NCAA continues to preserve the "amateur" label in collegiate sports.
Although the NCAA and the schools reserve the right to use a player"s images and
names for commercial purposes, no athlete may be endorsed by or receive any
payment from businesses or corporations (Suggs, 2009; Murphy & Pace, 1994).
Student-athletes also may not receive financial assistant in addition to their grant-in-
aids or be paid for any work with private sports camps related to their sport

What This is saying is that even though these student athletes are being used commercially, whether it be their name or their face and they aren"t seeing a single dime. These athletes put a lot of time weekly into their sport.

[Jared,2016, "Should athletes be paid to play?", Daily Utah Cronicle, November 28 2017, http://college.usatoday.com... ]
Athletes work more than most students. The NCAA has a regulation that is intended to limit training for players to 20 hours per week. Would you be surprised to learn that very few athletes reported only practicing 20 hours per week? According to an NCAA survey conducted in 2011, Division I football players averaged 43 hours a week. Baseball came in second with 42.1 hours and men"s basketball came in third with 39.2. These are in-season numbers. This means that on top of class work and homework, athletes are working a full-time job.

A full time job is 35-40 hours a week. These college athletes are working on average, more than a full time job and they are receiving no payment.

Contention 2: Sport Scholarships are extremely competitive and very easy to lose.
The Con side most likely say something to the point of "College athletes are granted scholarships, and these take place of income and therefore they don"t need to be recognized as Employees.
(By Lauren Deutsch | 09/06/2016, The Crimson White.) Deutsch 16Moreover, athletes can, and do, lose scholarships due to injury or other reasons that can affect their ability to play. Four-year athletic scholarships do not exist; instead, they are renewable annually. Thus, an athlete can contribute to his team for three years, find himself injured, and suddenly have no way to pay for his senior year of college. He, of course, will have no sort of salary to fall back on, and he likely will not have had a chance to work a part-time job or internship, due to the intense time commitments during both the season and the off-season. He is essentially out of options. In these cases, conditional scholarships are simply not an adequate substitute for a traditional paycheck.

Because of this, it proves that what college athletes are currently receiving for their work is not adequate for the time and commitment they are putting in.

Ultimately, the time put in for practice and games takes away about all of these athletes time they could be spending on making money and their scholarships are not even close to what they should be getting as registered Employees.
Amphia

Con

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN EDITED FOR HIGHLIGHTING:

I firmly negate the following resolution:
Resolved: NCAA student athletes ought to be recognized as employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act

Contention 1: Forcing the NCAA and the colleges under its jurisdiction to pay student athletes would be too costly and result in a monopoly of talent.

A.Money (overtime)
www.businessinsider.com/college-student-athletes-spend-40-hours-a-week-practicing-2015-1. Peter Jacobs, news editor of Business Insiders, graduated from Cornell. January 17th, 2015.

Collegiate student-athletes may spend more than 40 hours a week practicing. Many student-athletes, however, reported that they more than 40 hours
...a separate NCAA survey found that student-athletes spent an average of 45 hours per week on athletics.

This means that NCAA schools would have to pay their students overtime money under the FLSA.

B. Loss of non-revenue sports and colleges
http://www.acenet.edu.... David Welch Suggs, professor of journalism at Georgia, November 17, 2017.

Only seven athletics programs at public universities broke even or had net operating income on athletics each year. Their athletics department is flush because it can depend on donations, ticket sales, royalties from rights fees and sponsorships, and distributions from lucrative television contracts. For almost every other university, sports is a money-losing proposition. Not even men"s basketball at places like Duke University or the University of Kansas can generate enough revenue to make programs profitable.
...most colleges and universities rely on direct and indirect support from general funds, student fees, and government appropriations

Most colleges cannot even break even revenue wise. How do you expect them to pay overtime as well?

C.Monopoly of Talent
http://www.spaceship-earth.org.... Roger Hicks, 23/02/06

With MONEY we can satisfy not just our material needs, but most of our non-material, social and psychological ones as well. MONEY is ideally suited to provide the kind of love humans are naturally inclined to feel. ...MONEY is the most versatile form of POWER.

Humans are more inclined to make decisions based on money over anything else, meaning student-athletes will attend the biggest colleges that can pay them the most money.

Contention 2: Student-athletes are already being compensated fairly for their time

A.Athletes get paid stipends and these stipends are adjusted to fit the needs of the student
Pistone, Matt; Young, Mike; Osburn, Maddi; Auelua, Daniel; Ricedorff, Rathen; and Frazier, Jabril, "To Pay, or Not to Pay... Student-athletes at Division 1 Universities" (2017).

While student-athletes...receive monthly stipends and free tuition, the NCAA rule is that student-athletes may not be compensated more than the cost of attending college. The monthly stipend has no upper- or lower limits but is calculated to keep students from paying out-of-pocket for normal living expenses.... Members of compliance and financial aid offices were interviewed to discover what factors go into the formula that determines the amount of a monthly stipend....student-athletes from all sports were interviewed to understand whether the amount of their stipend met monthly expenses. Student-athletes not on full scholarships were also consulted to see how they managed"between NCAA rules, compliance officers and increasing living costs"to get by and whether they thought the stipend was sufficient.

B.Other benefits (pro training, publicity, etc.)
http://www.ncaa.org.... November 2017.

Academic and Support Services
Student-athletes receive academic support, such as state-of-the-art technology and tutoring, and have access to athlete-focused academic advisors in addition to traditional academic advisors. The NCAA also provides resources each year to schools as part of the Academic Enhancement Fund.

Medical Care
The NCAA takes appropriate steps to modify safety guidelines, playing rules and standards.

Elite Training Opportunities
Student-athletes have regular access to top-notch coaching, facilities and equipment. These resources typically cost Olympic athletes thousands of dollars per year.

Healthy Living
Student-athletes have access to cafeteria "training tables" on campus. In addition, some schools hire nutritionists and dieticians to work with each individual student-athlete.

Exposure and Experiences
Student-athletes have the opportunity to travel across the country and around the world for competition, including regular-season, NCAA championships and foreign tours. Some student-athletes receive national and international exposure during competition. These experiences can open doors for the few who will compete professionally and for the majority who will go pro in something other than sports.
Debate Round No. 2
Momo12345

Pro

Your first contention says that paying student athletes would be too costly. But I would like to point out that these students are making the schools a lot of money. The better they do in competitive brackets the more money the school gets. And since that is their hard work, they should get money for that.

Also, define monopoly of talent.

You state that college athletes can spend more than 40 hours a week practicing.

Cite: [Torrance, 2017"why the NCAA should pay it athletes", Bosten university jornalism department, November 28, 2017, http://bunewsservice.com... ]
Card:The NCAA will argue that student-athletes are not "employees" under federal law, but the typical Division I college football player devotes more than 40 hours per week to his sport, more than the average American work week. Meanwhile, the annual NCAA Division I football championship is played on a Monday night, causing most athletes to miss class. In 2014, the national football championship even required Florida State football players to miss the first day of spring classes. At other schools, the road to the NCAA men"s basketball championship may require student-athletes to miss up to a quarter of all class days during their spring semester.

They are doing more work than a typical full time job that is 35-40 hours, and are getting no money for all the work they put in. This is wrong. Morally wrong. I understand the financial limits of these universities, but then again, you get paid for how well you do. So cost wouldn't be too much of a problem.
The schools with better teams who do very well, obviously make more money, which in turn means their students get paid more. But teams that don't do well, they won't get paid much at all. Purely because it is based off their work that men and women in our society get paid.

in your case you mention how money is the most versatile form of power. How we make decisions inclined to make money. Yet I don't see how this is a negative. If you are striving for a goal, and suddenly that goal has more value. Would you not try harder? Would you not put in even more work? This would allow these schools to do better because their students are putting in more effort and the schools in turn would make more money.

Then you said that athletes are already getting monthly stipends and free tuition. I would like to say that this is not enough. If an athlete is injured and cannot play. He loses his scholarship. And then where is he?
Analysis: The scholarships that these students earned are to easy to lose
Cite: (By Lauren Deutsch | 09/06/2016, The Crimson White.) Deutsch 16Card:Moreover, athletes can, and do, lose scholarships due to injury or other reasons that can affect their ability to play. Four-year athletic scholarships do not exist; instead, they are renewable annually. Thus, an athlete can contribute to his team for three years, find himself injured, and suddenly have no way to pay for his senior year of college. He, of course, will have no sort of salary to fall back on, and he likely will not have had a chance to work a part-time job or internship, due to the intense time commitments during both the season and the off-season. He is essentially out of options. In these cases, conditional scholarships are simply not an adequate substitute for a traditional paycheck.

What this piece of evidence is saying is that if they got paid for their work. That even if something horrible happened, they would have money to fall back on! their life wouldn't be over.

You keep stating that these students receive support and extremely expensive things, yet if they either get kicked out of the tem, flunk, or get injured. They are left totally on their own with nothing to fall back on.
Amphia

Con

My first contention explicitly states that forcing the NCAA and its colleges to pay the student athletes would be too costly and result in a monopoly of talent.
As I said, only 7 athletics programs at NCAA universities broke even .Not even men"s basketball at places like Duke University that have such an incredible team broke even. And since student athletes work more than average worker (a fact you agree with), they would have to be paid overtime as well. There 200 something NCAA schools, and only 7 break even or make money. That means over 90% of the colleges would not be able to afford minimum wage, let alone overtime.
In my 1st contention, I also mentioned that humans are more inclined to make decisions based on money over anything else. Thus colleges with more money ate the one that students will be attending. All the best athletes will be going to a certain group of schools leaving little else for other colleges.
"They are doing more work than a typical full time job that is 35-40 hours, and are getting no money for all the work they put in. This is wrong. Morally wrong. I understand the financial limits of these universities, but then again, you get paid for how well you do. So cost wouldn't be too much of a problem"" As I already addressed, the payment is not possible regardless of how well the athletes do. Also, we should be looking at this from a logical point of view. If paying these athletes is impossible, then we should not send colleges into debt.
"In your case you mention how money is the most versatile form of power. How we make decisions inclined to make money. Yet I don't see how this is a negative. If you are striving for a goal, and suddenly that goal has more value. Would you not try harder? Would you not put in even more work? This would allow these schools to do better because their students are putting in more effort and the schools in turn would make more money." What I was saying was that people make decisions based off money.

"Then you said that athletes are already getting monthly stipends and free tuition. I would like to say that this is not enough. If an athlete is injured and cannot play. He loses his scholarship. And then where is he?" One of the benefits I mentioned was Medical care. If an athlete is injured, the school will take care of their injury.
Losing their scholarships is bad but paying them isn"t going to solve this problem. I already talked about how universities are unable to pay for wages. If athletes now had to rely on wages, they would be worse off because one, they would be getting ridiculously low wages and two, if they became employees, they would lose all the benefits I mention in the 2nd round. Who would pay for their medical care? Not the school. They would not have any money or benefits to fall back on.

"You keep stating that these students receive support and extremely expensive things, yet if they either get kicked out of the team, flunk, or get injured. They are left totally on their own with nothing to fall back on." I already addressed getting injured. But regarding getting kicked out of the team or flunking, that is completely on them and no one else. If I am a cashier and I get fired, no one will argue for me that now I have no salary and have nothing to fall back on in case I get injured. That"s my own fault.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Momo12345 1 week ago
Momo12345
I am also in PuF. And yeah, just post arguments whenever.
Posted by Amphia 1 week ago
Amphia
I am in public forum debate and we did this topic in December, I think. It should be fun but I won't be able to post arguments immediately. That's cool right?
Posted by Amphia 1 week ago
Amphia
I am in public forum debate and we did this topic in December, I think. It should be fun but I won't be able to post arguments immediately. That's cool right?
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.