Berger v. NCAA - 843 F.3d 285 (7th Cir. 2016)

Rule:

A majority of courts have concluded that student athletes are not employees. For example, most courts have held that student athletes are not employees in the workers' compensation context and are thus not entitled to compensation from their schools for injuries they suffer while playing their respective sports.

Facts:

Gillian Berger and Taylor Hennig ("Appellants") were former students at the University of Pennsylvania ("Penn") who participated on Penn's women's track and field team. The Penn's women's track and field team was regulated by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”). Appellants sued Penn, the NCAA, and more than 120 other NCAA Division I member schools ("Appellees"), alleging that student athletes were "employees" within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. § 201. Accordingly, Appellants contend that the NCAA and its member schools violated the FLSA by not paying their athletes a minimum wage. Appellees moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). The district court granted Appellees' motions, holding that Appellants lacked standing to sue any of the Appellees other than Penn. Moreover, the district court held that the Appellants failed to state a claim against Penn because student athletes were not employees under the FLSA. The present appeal followed. 

Issue:

Could the student athletes be considered as “employees” under the FLSA?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The Court initially held that the Appellants lacked standing to sue any other Appellees than the university they attended. Ruling on the substantive matter, the Court noted that the economic reality of the working relationship between the alleged employee and the alleged employer must be examined in order to determine whether Congress intended the FLSA to apply to that particular relationship. In this case, the Court found that there existed a revered tradition of amateurism in college sports. That long-standing tradition defined the economic reality of the relationship between student athletes and their schools. The Court further held that the Appellants did not, and could not, allege that the activities they pursued as student athletes qualify as "work" sufficient to trigger the minimum wage requirements of the FLSA. Student participation in collegiate athletics was entirely voluntary. Moreover, the long tradition of amateurism in college sports, by definition, showed that student athletes—like all amateur athletes—participated in their sports for reasons wholly unrelated to immediate compensation. Therefore, as a matter of law, student athletes were not employees and were not entitled to a minimum wage under the FLSA.