PGA Tour Caddies file class-action suit against PGA Tour for use of likeness, bibs

[Patch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patch

Do a way with the caddies altogether. Make the pros carry their own bags. Do their own pre tournament routines. Figure things out on their own during a tournament. Pull/replace their own flags. That would solve this particular controversy.

i'm actually cool with that.  i would allow them to use push carts, but i would like to see that.

I am just trying to visualize Woods, or Mickelson pushing a three wheeler down the fairway to their next shot.

[colin007]

I am just trying to visualize Woods, or Mickelson pushing a three wheeler down the fairway to their next shot. :dance:

That would be awesome.

[Shorty]

I'm confused by the Christian caddies comment? What does this mean?

If you observe the behaviour of particular caddies, including those named, you will see that they are really big on grandstanding when the cameras and mics are on them, giving encouragement and advice to their players in a completely over the top and exaggerated way, and to me, clearly trying to expose their value to the viewers.

Some of these guys make it pretty clear that they think they are as important as the players and that the player would crumble without their support and soothing words.

As for their "likenesses" - give me a break. To the average viewer they are just anonymous guys carrying golf bags. With purse increases their percentages have given some of them them great incomes and they clearly now think they deserve to be seen as more integral to the game. (And may want medals at the Olympics, not that coaches and managers and trainers would)

"See that window to the right?  That's your target. Yep. I love that club. Now it runs from right to left, so anywhere right of the flag is just beautiful. You good with that? I'm loving it. Nice and Smooth. Now there's a creek behind the green and a bunker on the left. The bunker on the right is going to be better than being short, so I just think a stock 6. Yep. Focus. Loving it. Nice and smooth."

I left out half of the conversation.

Return to topic.....

[WUTiger]

... Do ordinary workers complain if they have to wear a corporate logo and change it weekly to promote the organisation that is, ultimately, paying their bills?

Caddies are not "ordinary workers," AKA employees. They are independent contractors.

It's not like the PGA gives them a medical plan and retirement.

The PGA makes a lot of $$ with the bib logos, and these "complementor" caddies help enhance the PGA product, and thus want more of the profits.

The PGA requires them to wear the promo bibs, which are not essential to them carrying the bags in an orderly and/or safe manner. The PGA is controlling their behavior with "employee" like rules, so the caddies want a share of the benefits of wearing the bibs.

It's not like Tim Finchem will have to eat his Big Mac with "no fries" to help pay for the caddies getting a cut. PGA won't suffer unduly if caddies get a cut.

PS - The bibs are not a dress-code issue.

[mvmac]

Attorney's for caddies fire back after Finchem's statement,

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/golf-central-blog/attorney-caddies-responds-finchems-statements/

Quote:

In a letter dated Feb. 5, Gene Egdorf stressed to Tour players that “the lawsuit filed by the caddies is not about or against the players nor does it involve your money.”

On Wednesday, Finchem declined to talk about the specifics of the suit, which was filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, but told reporters “[The player] makes an arrangement with somebody that’s going to carry the bag and work with him. They work out a financial arrangement ... the historical process is the player handles that.”

Finchem met with players on Tuesday night at Torrey Pines and was asked about the lawsuit, which claims caddies are forced to wear logo-covered bibs without receiving any proceeds from contracts that the lawsuit estimates are valued at $50 million annually.

In response, Egdorf wrote: “The Tour is intent on continuing to use caddies as human billboards without compensation and to control the caddie endorsement deals.”

The letter also said that Finchem informed players that bibs, which are a central component of the lawsuit, are not mandatory, but according to the Tour’s regulations handbook caddies are required to wear them.

Egdorf also explained that any type of funding for a caddie retirement program and improved health insurance, which is why the caddies are suing, would not come from either the players’ retirement funds or tournament purses.

“Most retirement plans do not allow for manipulation of the plan for matters like this,” Egdorf wrote. “We suggest that you review the retirement plan with your financial advisor and legal counsel. We think you will find the Tour is again blowing smoke and creating havoc.”

The caddies’ lawsuit also included a request for an injunction to protect the caddies from retribution either from the players they work for or the Tour.

“By this lawsuit, the caddies do not, have not, and have no intention of involving you. The caddies simply want to be treated fairly by the Tour for what they do to further the Tour’s initiatives,” he wrote.

[iacas]

Caddies are not "ordinary workers," AKA employees. They are independent contractors.

IANAL, but as I understand it, they are employees… of the players. Their employers can tell them where and when to show up, can fire them, can dictate the manner in which they behave, dress, act, etc. Part of that could be requiring the caddies to wear the supplied bib, so that the player can compete in the event, for which he's paid rather well (particularly if he makes the cut, finishes high in the standings, etc.).

BTW, the quote Mike just posted speaks to that: “[The player] makes an arrangement with somebody that’s going to carry the bag and work with him. They work out a financial arrangement…"

[colin007]

how about they wear the bib and turn it inside out?

im with the caddies on this one.

[iacas]

how about they wear the bib and turn it inside out?

Because their employer requires that they wear it properly, so their employer (the player) doesn't get fined.

[Quadhole]

How much do you think the charities get in the big picture... 10% of a small amount, maybe. Just like most charities, a way to hide SO MUCH profit. Put your worthless brother in law on the board of charity and give away to compensate for his schumkyiness.... Is that a word....

[Pretzel]

Because their employer requires that they wear it properly, so their employer (the player) doesn't get fined.

This is kind of how it seems. The caddies would need to go through the players, who the ones paying them and requiring the bibs be worn, not the PGA Tour. On the note of lost sponsorships: what companies would sponsor a caddie? No offense, but they aren't that recognizable to anyone outside the hardcore fans.

[Quadhole]

IANAL, but as I understand it, they are employees… of the players. Their employers can tell them where and when to show up, can fire them, can dictate the manner in which they behave, dress, act, etc. Part of that could be requiring the caddies to wear the supplied bib, so that the player can compete in the event, for which he's paid rather well (particularly if he makes the cut, finishes high in the standings, etc.).

BTW, the quote Mike just posted speaks to that: “[The player] makes an arrangement with somebody that’s going to carry the bag and work with him. They work out a financial arrangement…"

As much as I would love to see the rich get poorer by handing oer some of the money to caddies. This is true and it is where the LAW Lies in this debate. Players are "allowed to compete on the PGA" and their employees are dictated by players. In the big picture here they have little ground to stand on... This is the way everything is headed. 5 guys make 95% of everything and decide who gets the leftovers.

[turtleback]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pretzel


This is kind of how it seems. The caddies would need to go through the players, who the ones paying them and requiring the bibs be worn, not the PGA Tour.

On the note of lost sponsorships: what companies would sponsor a caddie? No offense, but they aren't that recognizable to anyone outside the hardcore fans.

Exactly, the logo on the bibs has value because of where they are being worn, not because of who they are being worn by.  The marketing value comes from the player, not the caddie.  Essentially the caddie is a billboard.

The caddies' attorney is undoubtedly getting all kinds of concerns from caddies and players about how this is really going to rebound against the players since they are clearly the employers.  And as soon as the players realize that they will end up being the targets, as they have to be, all hell is going to break loose.  The players are not going to be happy when they find out that it is they who are the only possible target.

The whole statement of the attorney for the caddies was pretty such nonsense, IMO, but this part was particularly foolish:

Quote:

Egdorf also explained that any type of funding for a caddie retirement program and improved health insurance, which is why the caddies are suing, would not come from either the players’ retirement funds or tournament purses.

“Most retirement plans do not allow for manipulation of the plan for matters like this,” Egdorf wrote. “We suggest that you review the retirement plan with your financial advisor and legal counsel. We think you will find the Tour is again blowing smoke and creating havoc.”

First of all, I don't think that even when they win plaintiffs get to tell respondents where they can and cannot get the money with which to satisfy a judgement.

Secondly, if the money is being paid out to fund these things for caddies then it has to come from somewhere, and since money is fungible it is impossible to say whether it is coming out of the charities' portion, the players' portion, or somewhere else.  But again the attorney is trying to delay the point at which this thing shifts from the tour to the players by reassuring them of something he has no way of controlling.  Again, because once the players realize that they have to end up as the targets it will hit the fan.  If the attorney wasn't worried about that and really believed he had a convincing argument that this wasn't going to cost the players in a big way, he wouldn't be pushing for an injunction to prevent the players from taking action against them.  If the players are truly a third party, and not part of the suit, what justification is there for the injunction?

[Rick Martin]

in the long run - the spectators pay the bill.....and the price for some events is getting near the price I pay to see NFL games

[Spitfisher]

in the long run - the spectators pay the bill.....and the price for some events is getting near the price I pay to see NFL games

wrong,  spectators contribution to a tournament is at best pennys on the dollar, the real money is from TV, advertising  and corporate contributions.

[Patch]

I like the part about a caddy being a "walking billboard". When I was running my own business, I remember I paid $60K a year for billboards advertising my business. If a caddy is considered a walking billboard, then they need to be paid. Now that I think about it, my oldest grandson's first job was standing on a corner, waving a banner/sign for $10 an hour. He was some what of a walking billboard.

As I posted before, this will be interesting to watch, and see how it pans out.

[BallStriker]

Seriously, guys, if you don't like it, find another job. They've accepted these conditions for awhile now.

Your opinions are usually well-reasoned, but this statement is simply ignorant.

[saevel25]

Your opinions are usually well-reasoned, but this statement is simply ignorant.

It isn't ignorant it is a fact. If the Caddies do not like how their contracts are structured. In the end they are basically independent contractors. They should talk to their employer, the golfer and see what they can do. Besides that the PGA Tour doesn't owe the caddies anything. If they don't like it, don't work that job or find a new golfer who gives you a better contract.

[Pretzel]

Your opinions are usually well-reasoned, but this statement is simply ignorant.

It's not ignorant.

The caddies wanting a cut of the marketing pie would be the same as if the guy waving the "Homes for Sale" sign demanded a commission for every home sold during his shift. Part of their job is the advertising, it's already baked into their contract.

Their contract states they do as the player tells them to, and the player is telling them to wear the bibs because the PGA tells the players it's required. It's that simple. It literally is their job to wear that bib, and that's part of what they get paid for already.