Student-athletes at state universities would be allowed to organize into unions under bills recently sponsored in the Michigan House of Representatives. The Democratic sponsors say the bills would empower student athletes who often provide great value to their institutions.

The legislation would classify student athletes as university employees instead of amateur competitors.  If signed into law, the bills would set the stage for union bargaining over questions like revenue sharing, training and work conditions, and name image and likeness (NIL) agreements. 

Rep. Joe Tate (D-Detroit) is a former Michigan State University football player who also went pro. He said student athletes who bring money into schools get a bigger voice in their working conditions and, in some cases, a share of ticket sales and lucrative broadcast deals.

“Whether it’s this revenue coming in, and just kind of that explosion there, and student athletes not being able to take advantage of that,” he said.

The legislation follows a settlement agreement between the NCAA and Division 1 schools on revenue sharing with student-athletes.

Earlier this year, the National Labor Relations Board — under pressure from President Donald Trump — also rescinded a 2021 memo that classified college athletes as “employees” with collective bargaining rights. The Trump administration also fired the NLRB attorney who wrote the memo that determined college athletes meet the legal definition of employees.

“Welcome to the future because now that there’s billions of dollars pouring into these schools, these athletic departments for sports entertainment, it is professional,” said Thomas Dieters, who helps negotiate name, image and likeness deals for college athletes, including the Michigan State University women’s gymnastics team.”The schools and the leagues and the NCAA, they just have to come to that realization and admit it, this is professional sports.”

The two bills would allow student athletes to form labor unions and make collective bargaining agreements and strengthen rights to make name, image and likeness (NIL) deals. The legislation is silent on academic requirements or student status to be eligible to play.

That is by design, said state Rep. Carry Rheingans (D-Ann Arbor), one of the bill sponsors.

“That’s so the students and their labor organizers and the universities and the athletic departments would be able to negotiate the terms of the contract,” she said. “I don’t want to dictate the terms of the contract because it’s for the experts, the people who are living this life to negotiate the terms of the contract.”

Rheingans said student-athletes at smaller state universities would benefit even if their schools do not have big broadcast and endorsement contracts. She said bargaining could still include a share of ticket receipts, as well as training conditions and medical benefits.

Legislative Republicans, who control the Michigan House, said they are watching to see how legal developments play out, but are definitely cool to the idea of unionizing student athletes at public universities.

“I think there’s a lot of questions about NIL deals right now. I don’t think anyone’s looking to expand things to let student athletes have a union representing them,” said Rep. Gerald Van Woerkom (R-Norton Shores). “I think there’s much more interest in getting roads funding done and getting the school budget done than in letting student athletes form a union.”

There’s new legislation in Lansing aimed at preventing universities and other groups from interfering with Michigan college athletes earning money by marketing their name, image, or likeness —also known as NIL.

NIL has become a profitable sideline for many Michigan athletes. Analysts say those deals can be worth millions of dollars, though most are more modest.

But a recent settlement of a national anti-trust lawsuit may change the game.

The House v. NCAA settlement was finalized earlier this month. It resolves multiple antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA and its member schools, awarding $2.8 billion in back pay to athletes who were denied the chance to profit from their name, image, or likeness between 2016 and 2024.

The settlement also creates a framework for future revenue sharing between schools and student-athletes, allowing schools to directly pay athletes for NIL rights, and introduces new roster limits to replace scholarship limits.

However, a clause in the settlement that establishes a special commission to assess deals that student athletes can get is not being welcomed by NIL supporters.

Ramogi Huma, the executive director of the National College Players Association, said he believes such a commission would cost athletes.

“If such violations of Michigan’s NIL law do take place, it could cost Michigan college athletes tens of millions of dollars in NIL compensation each year,” said Huma.

And Thomas Dieters, the board president of Charitable Gift America, a group that negotiates NIL deals, sees the commission as essentially being unfair to student athletes.

“School administrators and coaches are very quick to negotiate their own seven figure contracts without a third party determining their value,” said Dieters, “Students should have those exact same rights.”

Former State House Speaker Joe Tate (D-Detroit) is a former standout athlete at Michigan State University, as well as a player in the National Football League. He’s currently running for Michigan’s open U.S. Senate seat in 2026.

Tate’s bill would block schools, conferences, governing bodies and other groups from interfering with athletes cutting their own NIL deals.

“One of the things that this legislation looks to do were not only protecting student athletes in their ability to take advantage of their name, image, and likeness — also empowering them,” said Tate.

A University of Michigan Athletics spokesperson declined to comment on the legislation.