The Business of Sports Agents

12. A Uniform Approach: The Uniform Athlete Agents Act

Chapter 12 A Uniform Approach The Uniform Athlete Agents Act The Process of Developing a Uniform Athlete Agents Act Somewhat anticlimactically, a uniform law regulating sports agents became official in the first year of the new millennium. The full impact of the uniform law is still not yet clear. This chapter describes the process undertaken to develop the Uniform Athlete Agents Act, discusses the basic elements of the final product, and provides some analysis of its likely long-term impact. On August 3, 2000, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Law (NCCUSL) completed a process begun in 1996 when it passed the long-awaited Uniform Athlete Agents Act (UAAA).1 The press release issued by NCCUSL identified the purpose of the act as protecting the interests of student athletes and academic institutions by regulating the activities of athlete agents. The promulgation of uniform laws such as the UAAA is not novel.2 Three familiar examples of the 250 uniform laws drafted by NCCUSL are the Model Penal Code, the Uniform Probate Code, and the Uniform Commercial Code. Before examining the UAAA, we briefly discuss NCCUSL and its function.3 The primary function of the NCCUSL is to promote “uniformity in state law on all subjects where uniformity is desirable and practicable.”4 (This purpose certainly brings to mind the sports agent–related dilemmas discussed herein.) The NCCUSL consists of 340 commissioners who are appointed by the governors of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The process by which commissioners are appointed differs from state to state;5 however, commissioners most typically are “lawyers, judges, legislators and law school professors.”6 The process that led to promulgation of the UAAA began when NCCUSL ’s Committee on Scope and Program, by a narrow three-to-two vote, recommended to the organization’s Executive Committee that a drafting committee be established to “draft an act to govern the relationship among sports agents, student athletes and educational institutions .”7 The Executive Committee assigned the UAAA to the Study Committee on Athlete Agents, which it created in 1996.8 The purpose of the Study Committee was articulated as follows: “The committee was created to study the problem of sports agents contacting college athletes prematurely and affecting their eligibility, in order to determine whether a uniform act should and could be created consistent with National Conference policy, and if so, whether outside funding would be available for the drafting effort.”9 Thus, early on, the focus of the uniform legislation was on issues relating to recruitment, not sports agent quality control. In July 1996, NCCUSL’s Executive Committee approved the creation of a Drafting Committee by a narrow six-to-five vote. The close vote was a manifestation of low support for the proposed act due to “a heavy Conference agenda and concern that drafting a Uniform Athlete Agents Act would have less impact on a national basis than many other topics on the agenda or to be proposed.”10 Following the creation of the Drafting Committee, a search to find funding for the project was successful when the NCAA agreed to “allocate $50,000 for the drafting of an act relating to sports agents.”11 NCAA support seems appropriate considering the legislation’s narrow focus on sports agents’ recruitment of student athletes . This is a prime concern of the NCAA, and not as urgent a concern for other stakeholders in sports, including the professional leagues and unions. Securing funding and “including the interests of student-athletes in the drafting process” were conditions imposed by the Executive Committee when it approved the establishment of a Drafting Committee.12 After funding was obtained, the Drafting Committee proceeded with the development of the UAAA. At the end of a three-year drafting process—which allowed comments by various interested parties including athlete agents; coaches; individuals responsible for administering existing acts; representatives of the players’ associations of the NFL, the NHL, and Major League Baseball; and the NCAA—NCCUSL approved the UAAA during its annual meeting on August 3, 2000.13 Once a uniform act is passed by the conference and endorsed by the American Bar Association, NCCUSL urges state legislatures to adopt the proposed uniform act. Although a state legislature may adopt a uniform act as proposed by NCCUSL, it may also vary the provisions of the act. As a result, absolute uniformity may not exist even if all fifty states adopt a particular uniform act. In reality, however, a lack of...