by Jack L. Daniel
Thanks to a relatively recent Supreme Court decision, University of Pittsburgh student athletes as well as all other NCAA athletes can earn money through endorsements that make use of their names and images. The Supreme Court’s majority opinion took note of the fact that the NCAA is a multi-billion-dollar industry, with football conferences earning hundreds of millions of dollars, and collegiate officials such as Athletics Directors, Coaches, and Presidents annually earning millions of dollars. Regarding the past NCAA restrictions related to student athletes’ ability to be compensated, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote, “the NCAA’s business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America.”
Herein, it is held that, given the significant institutional services rendered and the compensation others receive related to those same services, Black student leaders of campus equity and social justice organizations should be appropriately compensated. This is advocated in part, because just as in the case of NCAA sports, institutions such as the University of Pittsburgh are multi-billion-dollar industries, notwithstanding their noble missions related to higher education. For example, in a Pitt impact statement, some of the highlights are as follows:
- Pitt’s economic impact totals $4.2 billion annually.
- Pitt generates $20 in Pennsylvania for every $1 invested in the University and our students.
- Pitt returns $184 million in tax revenue to state and local governments.
- The University, its faculty, staff, students and visitors spend a combined $1.7 billion on businesses in Pennsylvania. Pitt’s Impact | With Pitt | University of Pittsburgh
In addition, Pitt brings more than $850 million external research funding to Pennsylvania each year and, in doing so, it is one of the nation’s national leaders in terms of National Institutes of Health funding Research | University of Pittsburgh.
In various statements and concomitant programmatic activities, Pitt declared the pursuit of diversity, inclusion, equity and social justice to be among its very highest priorities. In June 2020, Chancellor Patrick Gallagher poignantly stated, “…A university is not an ivory tower but an extension of society—a place dedicated to advancing knowledge for everyone’s gain. Racism degrades our pursuit of true equality, liberty and justice, and it undermines our ability to create opportunity through teaching, research and service. Our university must become a better, more equitable place, and we can do more. …We can expand our efforts to translate our work into practice and spur a local renaissance in our surrounding neighborhoods and communities.
Reshaping our university to be more diverse, inclusive and just—while also expanding our reach and impact in promoting social justice—is a significant effort, and we will need to resource and sustain this transformation over time. Because of this, I am putting our nearly complete strategic planning process—which aims to chart Pitt’s course over the next five years—on hold. This pause will give us time to incorporate specific strategies to strengthen our commitments to racial equity and justice. I will need your help in identifying the most promising initiatives in this final plan, and I hope you will participate…” (Highlighting mine).
At least since the 1960s, Black student campus leaders have responded to Pitt senior administrators’ calls for assistance to institutionally address equity and social justice. It was the direct actions of Pitt Black students that led to things such as [1] increases in Black faculty, staff, students, and administrators; [2] the creation of entities such as the Africana Studies Department, formal programs to provide Black students with support services, and the African American Library Collection; as well as [3] the hiring of the past and current phalanx of diversity and inclusion officers. Yet, for the foregoing services and too many more to enumerate herein, Black student leaders have not been appropriately compensated, if indeed they were compensated at all. Thus, their unequal treatment is analogous to what had been transpiring with NCAA student athletes.
Consider the fact that Black student diversity, inclusion, equity and social justice leaders often volunteer far more than 15 hours per week while advising/urging/teaching senior administrators, faculty, and staff. At the same time, estimates suggest that “diversity consultants” earn approximately $80,000 per year.
During my more than a half century association with Pitt, I observed the emotional, physical, and academic toll taken on Black student leaders —all while they, without compensation, advised very highly compensated Chancellors, Provosts, Vice Presidents, Department Chairs, and Senior faculty regarding how best to pursue the declared very high institutional priority of diversity, inclusion, equity and social justice.
From the free labor of Black students, careers have been derived for Black faculty, administrators, and staff members. It was from the demands of Black students that I became a Department Chair and, eventually, a Vice Provost, Dean, and Distinguished Service Professor. It was a Black student demand that led to the initial administrative appointment of Donald M. Henderson who subsequently became Pitt’s first Black Provost. What then should be the appropriate compensation for Black student leaders who play significant roles in helping senior campus leaders undertake a critical aspect of their institutional mission?
For playing major roles in helping an institution such as Pitt achieve a national positive reputation related to diversity, inclusion, equity and social justice, should not the leaders of an organization such as Pitt’s Black Action Society receive the equivalent compensation that is provided Pitt Basketball and Football athletes, i.e., full room, board and tuition scholarships during their terms of service? While one might quibble with this compensation recommendation, one thing is certain: the Emancipation Proclamation declared an end to inappropriately using the free labor of Blacks and, centuries later, historically White institutions of higher education should not be dependent on the free labor of Black students to realize a major aspect of their institutional missions.
(Jack L. Daniel is Vice Provost and Professor Emeritus, University
of Pittsburgh.)
About Post Author
