Oregon hearing could decide if women’s college basketball players can unionize

A significant hearing will take place in Oregon this week that could impact the future of college athletics. A state board will decide if a group of Division I NCAA athletes are able to form a workers’ union as employees of a university.

Members of the Oregon State women’s basketball team filed a petition in late July for union representation with the Oregon Employment Relations Board, which marks a formal effort to seek collective bargaining rights under state law. The hearing for that petition begins Monday, Sept. 14, at 11 a.m. PT in Salem, Oregon.

As lawmakers in Washington, D.C., debate over a bill that could reshape college athletics — the Protect College Sports Act — the Oregon State filing is a historic milestone for the side that believes players should be recognized as employees.

It’s the first time a group of women college athletes have formally sought recognition as a players’ union. And unlike previous efforts by football players at Northwestern, men’s basketball players at Dartmouth and the recent formation by football players at Stanford, they are doing this at a public university — meaning that whether members of the Beavers’ women’s basketball team can become union members will be determined by state law, not federal.

Representing the members of Oregon State’s women’s basketball team is an attorney, Katelyn S. Oldham, working on behalf of the United College Athletes Association. In July, the UCAA announced more than 100 women’s college basketball players had signed union authorization cards, including Oregon State senior guard Jenna Villa. Former Oregon State women’s basketball player Mikayla Pivec is a co-founder of the UCAA.

Oluchi Okananwa, a women’s basketball player at Maryland who was an All-Big Ten selection this past season, is serving as the UCAA’s interim president.

“We the players deserve more than promises. We deserve a seat at the table, meaningful protections, fair compensation, and a collective bargaining agreement that raises the standard for everyone,” Okananwa said in July. “This work is bigger than any one season or generation. We are building lasting power for the athletes competing today and those who will come after us.”

USA TODAY Sports obtained copies of the petition filed by the UCAA on behalf of the players and Oregon State’s response. Of the 13 current Oregon State players, 10 signed union cards with the UCAA.

On behalf of the players, the UCAA argues that because the players receive compensation for work they perform for the university and pay taxes on that work “they meet the definition of public employees” under Oregon law and the state Employment Relations Board’s precedent. They claim Oregon State pays its women’s basketball players “a collective total of $543,000 per year” for competing for the Beavers “and performing other services dependent on their status as OSU Women’s Basketball Athletes.”

Attorneys for the UCAA write that Oregon State tells its women’s basketball players “they are not employees and do not perform services for OSU while simultaneously treating women’s basketball as a heavily marketed commercial enterprise, raking in revenue from spectators who pay to watch them compete, paying their coach $11 million over a decade with additional bonuses depending on if the (players) win important championship and tournament games, and demanding 20% liquidated damages payments if the (players) stop being on the team.”

The NCAA has consistently said student-athletes are not employees regardless of the revenue they create and despite courts paving the way for them to be compensated via NIL and revenue sharing.

In response to the petition, Oregon State’s attorneys wrote to the board: “This petition asks the Board to do two things no court or administrative agency has ever done: definitively classify student-athletes as employees, and certify a single team as an appropriate bargaining unit. The Board should decline both extraordinary requests.” Oregon State also says that the advent of NIL is “irrelevant” and revenue-sharing is “optional.”

Ultimately, Oregon State argues its women’s basketball players are not employees and “financial aid and NIL agreements are not wages or salary paid in return for playing basketball.”

On Tuesday, a few high-ranking Oregon State officials — including Provost and Executive Vice President Roy Haggerty — are expected to testify in front of the board.

Oregon’s Employment Relations Board has three members, all appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate. All three members of the board were appointed and approved while Democrats held power in the state government, with Democratic governors and a Democratic majority in the state Senate. Adam Rhynard was appointed to the board in 2013, Shirin Khosravi in 2022 and Benjamin O'Glasser in 2023.

In Oregon State’s response to the petition — authored by attorney Joshua D. Nadreau — it is clear-eyed about the type of impact that recognizing the women’s basketball players as employees might have:

“Any board decision finding student-athletes to be public employees would reach far beyond the proposed bargaining unit, potentially affecting wage and hour law, immigration and tax treatment, Title IX, scholarships, NCAA and conference compliance, and competitive relationships among public and private institutions nationwide.”