We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Caddies File Lawsuit Against PGA Tour

JB

JB

Follow @THPGolf on Social Media
Albatross 2024 Club
Staff member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
283,974
Reaction score
436,994
Location
THP Experiences
Human billboards, huh?

I think they have a point considering the tour is not paying them to be out there.
 
I have no idea what to think about this but I'll be interested to hear what people think on the matter.
 
That's interesting, and something I've never thought of - I sort of see where they're coming from. I wonder if the outcome of this would be a stipend or something from the tour for caddies, so they still wear the bib?
 
I think they have a point. They are independent contractors, just like the players. I understand a dress code, but once you start making money off of ads on their bodies, they should have a say or get a cut.
 
I see both sides. On one hand the caddies aren't being compensated for wearing advertising, while on the other hand there is nothing preventing a caddie from getting any sort of apparel sponsorship on his own.
 
jlukes said:
I see both sides. On one hand the caddies aren't being compensated for wearing advertising, while on the other hand there is nothing preventing a caddie from getting any sort of apparel sponsorship on his own.
Click to expand...

I am not sure if it's still the case, but they used to be prohibited from wearing a hat that didn't have a Nature Valley logo on it. Their trunk is covered by a bib, so the only thing they could do is basically a sleeve, which Steve Williams did for Valvoline.
 
Erky said:
I am not sure if it's still the case, but they used to be prohibited from wearing a hat that didn't have a Nature Valley logo on it. Their trunk is covered by a bib, so the only thing they could do is basically a sleeve, which Steve Williams did for Valvoline.
Click to expand...

From the article

Most significantly, caddies can wear sponsored logos on their clothing. This means that caddies can freely sign sponsorship deals with apparel companies, like New Balance and Nike, and wear those companies’ clothing in front of TV cameras.
 
First off they picked a great jurisdiction to file the case. One that is not afraid to shake the boat on precedent. It is going to be super hard for the caddies to get anywhere with this case. Mentioned in the article are some of the defenses for the PGA tour and in my opinion they are on the better side.
 
very interesting. i see where they are coming from. employed by the player and not the tour, forced to adhere to a uniform code defined by the tour and being forced to wear a bib that holds advertisement they arent being compensated for.

will be interesting to see how this plays out.
 
Interesting issues. Can't wait to see what defenses the PGA relies on most, as there seem to be a number of ways it could play out in court, as well as the press.
 
Is Hicks still caddying? If I was an active caddy I don't think I would look to kindly to someone presumably on the outside stirring the pot on this. The article states that no caddy ever has chose not to wear his bib during a competition. I would like to see a group of them show up in golf shirts with their players name on the back next tournament and then see the Tours response. I suspect the sponsors would not like it.

Also, they are not required to be there so the Tour can just tell them if you don't like it, don't show up to work for your player.

Seems to me that they are potentially screwing up a very good gig.
 
Interesting. That should end up taking a few years to work through the court system (or it will settle within 1 year).

~Rock
 
I definitely understand the argument from the caddies here. However, based on what the article says it seems as though they will have a difficult time because of the bib being a voluntary thing. I think they are going to have to show some evidence of a caddie refusing to wear a bib and receiving a threat of being fired or fined. They would have to have documentation to back this up otherwise it wouldn't hold up too well. What I think we will see though is some caddies starting to refuse to wear their bibs of this thing gets shot down.
 
As I read this, while I understood the caddies concern, it seemed more almost traditional rather than required. Then I got to the blurb about Ryan Palmer's caddie having to explain why he took his off for the playoff at the Honda last year. Seems like if the tour gave each caddie say $100 a week to wear them, so what $15K or less cost for the tour each week, then everyone of them would don them happily. Probably oversimplification, but if it is in least implicitly required, I'm not sure they should be expected to comply as advertising for free.
 
I see what is being said by the caddies but it is part of the job and without the sponsor there would be no tournaments. This will take forever in the court system and by then 50% of the money will go in the lawyers pockets and the rest divided among those caddies and heirs and it could spell a not so good turn-out for golf events in the future IMO.
 
Do they get paid to advertise The Masters when they wear those jumpsuits?
 
Like most, I never thought about this issue. I can see both sides and I think it will be very interesting if this case makes it to the discovery phase.
 
It is interesting. They are paid for wearing the bibs indirectly through the prize winnings of the golfer for whom they caddy I would imagine. I could see the result being that they are paid a base amount (same paid to all caddies, one amount for 2 days and another amount for 4 days) by the PGA and paid another amount through their golfer. In this scenario, the prize money would likely decrease. Will be interested to follow the case.
 
Interesting. I can see their point, especially if there is some coercion going on with making sure they wear the bibs. Has this been brought up at all before, anything else tried to change this before just filing a suit? Just seems to me like a lawsuit should be the last ditch effort of trying to change something like this. It's the first I've heard of it, but maybe I'm just not aware anything else was done/said/tried.
 
Would seem to me that the PGA Tour would have a strong interest in not letting this get to the discovery phase. Would be interested in hearing the take from our THP members that are attorneys

DufferToo said:
Like most, I never thought about this issue. I can see both sides and I think it will be very interesting if this case makes it to the discovery phase.
Click to expand...
 
It will be interesting to see where this goes. The fact that it was filed in the same court that sided with Ed O'Bannon might help the cause also.

In terms of the caddies I think they deserve something. It's a thankless job, but like any other job it's what they signed up for so they knew going in what the parameters they would be working under. The Bruce Edwards story comes to mind when thinking about caddies and their ability to maintain a decent living looping on tour. If not for Tom Watson, Bruce would have passed well before he did given his condition. I'm sure tour players take care of their guys and make sure they are taken can of, but the tour is exploiting them on some level and allowing them to share in the revenue seems counterproductive to me.

At the same time I wonder if an arbitration type situation could have hammered out these details instead of filing a lawsuit. It will be interesting to see this one play out.
 
INgolfer said:
I definitely understand the argument from the caddies here. However, based on what the article says it seems as though they will have a difficult time because of the bib being a voluntary thing. I think they are going to have to show some evidence of a caddie refusing to wear a bib and receiving a threat of being fired or fined. They would have to have documentation to back this up otherwise it wouldn't hold up too well. What I think we will see though is some caddies starting to refuse to wear their bibs of this thing gets shot down.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly, INgolfer. Well said.
 
wonder if I can sue the car dealer for always throwing a sticker or license plate border on my car. I'm no free billboard!
 
<pot stirring>
You work for company XYZ. They hand out shirts that have a logo for Omaha Steaks on the back and tell you that you have to wear it, because it's now a company uniform.
What if you had some conflict with this company? What if you're a vegan? What if it's against your religion?! (too far?)

Or, what if it's a Chevy logo? Your name happens to be Ford...yes, THOSE Fords. Conflict of interest at this point.

What do you do?

</stirring>


PS Dean, I never accept delivery until that crap's gone. It really pisses them off, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top