From "Amateurs" to Employees: How NIL Has Reshaped the Employment Status of College Athletes

The emergence of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) compensation has fundamentally reshaped college athletics, exposing a growing disconnect between the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) “student-athlete” model and the economic reality of modern-day college athletics. While courts have historically deferred to the principle of amateurism, this Comment argues that NIL has eroded the factual and legal foundations underlying that deference. This Comment reframes the employment-status inquiry through the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) economic-reality test, arguing that many college athletes today meet the statutory definition of “employees.” Drawing on Johnson v. NCAA as a structured articulation of longstanding FLSA principles, this Comment demonstrates that college athletes perform services under institutional control, for the primary benefit of universities, and have a reasonable expectation of compensation. It further contends that House v. NCAA resolves the final doctrinal barrier by legitimizing the revenue sharing and institutional payments between college athletes and their schools, thereby solidifying that expectation. Situating these developments within the broader history of FLSA jurisprudence, this Comment argues that recognizing college athletes as employees is not a departure from existing law, but a natural extension of it. Ultimately, this Comment concludes that employee classification aligns legal reality with economic reality and provides a coherent framework for regulating modern college athletics.