Economic Exploitation in Intercollegiate Athletics

Abstract

This paper investigates philosophically the question of whether or not college and university athletes in the USA are doing something morally wrong should they terminate their college or university experience prior to graduation and enter the professional athletic ranks. Various moral arguments are brought to bear in order to attempt to shed light on this issue. One reason why such athletes ‘turn professional’ before they graduate is the perceived economic exploitation they experience as essentially underpaid workers earning much revenue for their respective institutions. But who is exploiting whom here? Is it just student athletes who are exploited by the system? I expand the reasoning about the exploitation of intercollegiate athletics to include not just student athletes, but their supporting colleges and universities. In the end, it is proposed that the National Collegiate Athletic Association and similar academically related athletic agencies should permit and encourage each of their constituent institutions as a matter of policy to protect themselves (and their supporting taxpayers, in the cases of public institutions) contractually from economic exploitation by professional sports franchises. Thus the question of student athletes leaving college for professional sports contracts has hidden beneath it questions of private professional sports franchises’ exploitation of the institutions with which such student athletes are affiliated.

Este artículo investiga filosóficamente la cuestión de si los atletas universitarios de los Estados Unidos están haciendo algo moralmente incorrecto cuando terminan su experiencia universitaria antes de graduarse para entrar en competiciones profesionales. Se han propuesto varios argumentos con el fin de tratar de aclarar esta cuestión. Una de las razones de por qué dichos atletas “se vuelven profesionales” antes de graduarse es la clara explotación económica que experimentan en tanto que esencialmente trabajadores mal pagados que logran grandes ingresos para la institución que trabajan. Pero ¿quién está explotando a quien aquí? ¿Son sólo los atletas estudiantes quienes son explotados por el sistema? Extenderé este razonamiento sobre la explotación en el deporte interuniversitario para incluir no solo a los atletas, sino también a las universidades que les mantienen. Al final, se propondrá que la National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) e instituciones similares relacionadas con la academia deberían permitir y estimular a cada una de las instituciones que las conforman legalmente a protegerse a sí mismas (y a los contribuyentes que las apoyan, en los casos de las instituciones públicas) de forma contractual de la explotación económica ejercida por las franquicias deportivas profesionales. Así, la cuestión de que los estudiantes abandonen la universidad por contratos deportivos profesionales ha ocultado tras de sí problemas referidos a la explotación que las franquicias deportivas privadas profesionales ejercen sobre las instituciones con las que están afiliados tales atletas.

Dieser philosophische Essay fragt, ob US-amerikanische College- und Universitätssportler moralisch falsch handeln, wenn sie ihre Beschäftigung an den Hochschulen vorzeitig abbrechen, um in den Profisport zu wechseln. Um diese Frage zu beantworten, werden verschiedene moralische Argumente zur Anwendung gebracht. Ein Grund, warum sich Sportler dafür entscheiden, die Profi-Karriere dem Studium vorzuziehen, ist die vergleichsweise geringe Entlohnung, die im Verhältnis zum Gewinn der beteiligten Institutionen, als Ausbeutungsverhältnis wahrgenommen wird. Doch wer wird hier tatsächlich ausgebeutet? Sind es nur die Studierenden die innerhalb dieses Systems ausgebeutet werden? Meine These ist, dass nicht nur die Studierenden ausgebeutet werden, sondern ebenso die sie unterstützenden Colleges und Universitäten. Darum schlage ich vor, die “National Collegiate Athletic Association” und die mit ihr zusammenhängenden Institutionen (auch im Sinne des Steuerzahlers und der Verwendung öffentlicher Mittel) dazu zu ermutigen, sich rechtlich gegen die Ausbeutung privater Sportunternehmen zu schützen. Denn hinter der Frage der Ausbeutung der Sportstudierenden, die den Universitäten abgeworben werden, verbirgt sich die eigentliche Frage der Ausbeutung öffentlicher Institutionen durch private (Sport-) Unternehmen.

Cet article examine philosophiquement la question de savoir si oui ou non les athlètes des lycées et universités aux Etats-Unis peuvent faire quelque chose de moralement mal qui pourrait mettre un terme à leur experience universitaire avant leur obtention du diplôme et d’entrer dans les rangs des sportifs professionnels. Des arguments moraux divers sont apportés pour éclairer la question dans ce numéro. Une des raisons pour laquelle de tels athlètes “ deviennent professionnels” avant qu’ils n’obtiennent leur diplome est l’exploitation économique perçue qu’ils éprouvent comme des travailleurs sous-payés gagnants beaucoup plus pour leurs institutions respectives que pour eux-mêmes. Mais ici qui exploite qui ? Est-ce juste des athlètes étudiants qui sont exploités par le système ? J’étends le raisonnement de l’exploitation d’athlétisme inter-universitaire pour inclure non seulement les athlètes étudiants mais les universités qui les soutiennent. A la fin, nous proposons que l’Association Sportive Universitaire Nationale et les agences sportives académiquement liées doivent permettre et encourager chacune de leurs institutions constitutives de prendre des polices de protection pour elles-mêmes (et leurs contribuables de soutien, dans le cas des institutions publiques) contractuellement de l’exploitation économique par des franchises sportives professionnelles. Ainsi la question du depart des athlètes étudiants quittant l’université pour signer des contrats sportifs professionnels aura servi à cacher les questions de l’exploitation par des franchises sportives professionnelles privées des institutions avec lesquelles de tels athlètes étudiants sont affiliés.

本文探討的哲學問題為, 美國大專學生運動員提前終止學業進入職業, 是否有道德上的錯誤。為闡明此議題, 過往已有許多相關的道德論爭。導致這些運動員在畢業前轉職業的原因, 來自於他們能為學校賺取可觀收益, 但過低的報酬使他們感覺受到經濟的剝削。但究竟是誰在剝削誰?只有學生運動員在這體制裡被剝削嗎?我因此把解釋範圍擴大到大專院校運動整體, 其中包含學生運動員以及背後支持的學校。本文結論提出, 全美大學體育協會及類似的學術性運動代表, 應准許並鼓勵隸屬他們之下的組織提出相關對策, 以保護組織本身 (以及相關公共組織的納稅人), 免於職業運動的經濟剝削。因此隱藏在學生運動員棄學投入職業運動的議題之下的是, 私人職業運動剝削學生運動員所屬組織的問題。

KEYWORDS:

• exploitation
• moral obligation
• NCAA
• professional sports franchises
• student athletes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Thomas Maloney, Mike McNamee, and anonymous referees for this journal for their incisive comments on earlier drafts of this paper.

Notes

1. A recent example is Kawai Leonard (former starting start forward at San Diego State University), who left intercollegiate athletics early for a career in the NBA, only to be drafted by the San Antonio Spurs and placed in its starting lineup. Leonard had a rather successful rookie season in 2011–2012 and continues to be a significant contributory cause of the Spurs’ success.

2. A good example here is the men’s basketball team at the University of Kentucky, which has suffered a horrible season this year after losing some of its star players from last year’s NCAA championship team after they played only one or two years at the collegiate-level.

3. I assume throughout this discussion that the student athletes in question satisfy the NCAA academic requirements for student athletes. Otherwise, an argument might be made against the very presence of such students on campuses as they would constitute a form of waste, fraud and corruption at least with respect to the fiscal irresponsibility that would obtain with regard to public higher educational institutions supported by tax dollars.

4. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/bob-knight-disgrace-own-design-calls-one-done-160044193.html (accessed 9 April 2012).

5. I interpret Karl Marx to think the same about economic exploitation, following the interpretation of Marx found in Cohen (1988, Part III).

6. Of course, a similar point might be made of many students who are not athletes.

7. By ‘harm’ is meant the setting back of a legitimate interest (Feinberg 1984).

8. I recognize the private colleges and universities are also impacted by this problem, at least but not limited to the fact that student athletes at such private institutions are often funded in part by public tax-funded scholarships, etc. However, public colleges and universities are affected by such practices in more obvious ways than are private ones. Hence, my focus is on public higher-educational institutions.

9. To be clear, the argument for reimbursement to colleges and universities applies only to those particular college athletes who succeed in going pro for the dough, to their respective colleges and universities, and to the particular sports franchises that successfully and initially recruit (hire) them.

10. This is true despite the fact that such businesses pay taxes that, it might be argued, help pay for public higher-education. It is an empirical question as to whether or not taxes on such businesses would on a case by case basis be approximately equivalent to what it costs publicly-funded colleges and universities to relevantly prepare professional athletes.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

J. Angelo Corlett

Angelo Corlett, Philosophy, SDSU, 5500 Campanile Drive, San Diego, CA, 92182, USA. E-mail: [email protected]