Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1903
Reg: 11-29-04
|
02-12-24 06:56 AM - Post#363144
In response to palestra38
I posted on the Dartmouth board, but now see that this group makes more sense...
-----------
Just curious. How does this work, exactly? If they strike, does the team just stop playing games? I know that won't look good for alumni, but it doesn't exactly impact the broader school 's operations or business.
I'm just a little bit lost on this concept. Anyone have insight?
If this is something real, then the Union chose a pretty weak starting point. This is one of the least revenue generating, least profitable, least prestige building, least irreplaceable teams in sports - against a school and league that doesn't care that much about sports and has a lot of financial capacity to deal with legal issues.
This is also one of the situations where they will have the least sympathy. Wouldn't fellow students and alumni resent them asking to be paid in a money losing sport which has brought little glory to the University - while the cost of tuition is rising? Do they threaten to leave the school? Would students stop attending classes and paying tuition and would professors stop showing up to support them?
As you can see, I'm not getting it. Unionization is about building leverage. This feels like some students trying to build a story to tell about their courage - but it seems to have no likelihood of achieving positive goals. It won't earn much money due to league limits on practice hours, and it won't help the players' future employment prospects in basketball or in the broader world. If they think they are helping others, it feels more like selfishness in that it will hurt all of the student athletes non-revenue generating sports. Colleges (even Stanford) are looking for reasons to cancel sports like sailing, golf, fencing, swimming, etc. and this would give them a convenient excuse.
Edited by Penndemonium on 02-12-24 07:04 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
