NFLPA "strongly opposes" proposed changes to California workers' compensation laws

Although most of an NFL player’s rights and responsibilities are governed by the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NFL Players Association and the NFL, the geographic location of a player’s employment has a potentially significant impact on their overall work experience.

The most obvious consequence of where a player works is the amount of state income tax the player pays. In multiple states, there’s none. In California, it’s 13.3 percent for all players except first-year players making the minimum salary of $885,000. (For them, it’s 12.3 percent.)

Balancing out the high personal income tax rate in California is a workers’ compensation system that traditionally has been favorable to NFL players. That’s why the NFLPA is mobilizing to oppose proposed changes to the California system.

“The NFL Players Association strongly opposes California SB 795, which would significantly restrict professional athletes’ access to the workers’ compensation system,” the NFLPA said Friday. “This bill targets our players, stripping them of the constitutional rights and legal protections afforded to every other worker in the state.

“As employees in a high-risk profession, NFL players rely on workers’ compensation as a critical protection. In fact, the cost of these benefits is already paid by our players out of their collectively bargained share of league revenue. By advancing this latest anti-player legislation, California’s professional sports teams are seeking to evade that system for financial gain, denying injured athletes the care they are owed.

“We will not accept a system that carves professional athletes out of hard-earned worker protections. Our union urges lawmakers to reject SB 795 and stand with the players who make the game possible.”

We’ll take a closer look at the proposed bill and outline the impact of the possible changes to NFL players — along with the potential benefit for NFL teams headquartered in California (the 49ers, Rams, and Chargers).

The significance of workers’ compensation benefits (and the associated premiums) has been well established over the years. The UFL, for example, has no teams in California. The Orlando Apollos of the defunct AAF practiced in Georgia, not Florida, due to differences in the workers’ compensation laws. Issues related to workers’ compensation insurance helped end one of the various iterations of the Arena Football League.

So, yes, it’s a big deal. We’ll now try to figure out how big it is, from a dollars and cents standpoint, as to players and as to those who own NFL teams.