[Softball Fan]

IMO the University directly paying players to participate in athletics unquestionably would make them employees of the University. It  would end any pretense that they are amateurs. It in no way could be connected to their "name, image, or likeness". It would be pay for service, period. I am sure the IRS and the State of California would see it that way.

The follow-on consequences would be "interesting". How long would athletic departments remain tax exempt, and would subsidizing sports that don't make money be an allowable cost of doing business? How does that fit with Title IX requirements? What if compensation was deferred and you had to "vest" by remaining "employed"? How does the portal work then :-). IMO, too ugly to contemplate.

If college athletes are classified as employees; California Assembly Bill 5, effective January 2020, forces the employer to treat them as all other employees, not as independent contractors.  That would mean all benefits paid to Stanford employees would also have to be paid to the athletes.  This would become unworkable in many ways.  There would have to be some amendments made to California laws about employees.

[Softball Fan]

IMO the University directly paying players to participate in athletics unquestionably would make them employees of the University. It  would end any pretense that they are amateurs. It in no way could be connected to their "name, image, or likeness". It would be pay for service, period. I am sure the IRS and the State of California would see it that way.

The follow-on consequences would be "interesting". How long would athletic departments remain tax exempt, and would subsidizing sports that don't make money be an allowable cost of doing business? How does that fit with Title IX requirements? What if compensation was deferred and you had to "vest" by remaining "employed"? How does the portal work then :-). IMO, too ugly to contemplate.

If college athletes are classified as employees; California Assembly Bill 5, effective January 2020, forces the employer to treat them as all other employees, not as independent contractors.  That would mean all benefits paid to Stanford employees would also have to be paid to the athletes.  This would become unworkable in many ways.  There would have to be some amendments made to California laws about employees.