Sports Management
Tae123
SpMgt577_Ch8_Notes.pptx
Gender Equity
Chapter 8
“If you build it, they will come”
In 1972, 295,000 girls played high school sport (7% of all high school athletes)
Today, over 240,000 (14% increase over the last 10 years) female student athletes compete in the NCAA (McGuire, 2026)
Before Title IX was passed, less than 32,000 women played college sport (less than 16% of all college athletes)
Today, over 40% of all high school athletes are female (NWLC, 2022)
Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972
“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.”
Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972
Title IX applies if any department in a school receives federal funding; the law applies to the entire school.
In response to the Grove City ruling, Congress passed the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987.
Today, institutions receiving any form of federal assistance must comply with Title IX.
Grove City College v. Bell (1984)
Case dealing with the application of Title IX
One of the biggest setbacks for women since passage of Title IX in 1972
Court found that Title IX was applicable only to those parts of the institution that received federal funding; thus, athletics were excluded.
Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987
Legislation reversed the findings in Grove City College and applied Title IX institution-wide.
Thus, if any part of an institution received federal funding, the entire institution was subject to the specifications in Title IX.
Regulation and Enforcement
Department of Education 1975 regulations focus on equal opportunity.
Program areas (i.e., equipment, locker rooms)
Effective accommodation of interests and abilities and selection of sports for both sexes
Equivalency in financial aid
The 1979 policy interpretation provides ways for schools to measure whether they comply with Title IX and the 1975 regulations.
Part 1: Financial assistance
Part 2: Equality in program areas
Part 3: Effective accommodation
Three-Part Test
Prong 1
Are participation opportunities for both sexes substantially proportionate?
This is a safe harbor if participation of underrepresented sex is substantially proportionate to other sex. If so, then stop here because compliance is determined; if not . . .
Prong 2
Can the institution show a history and continuing practice of program expansion? If yes, stop here; if not . . .
Prong 3
Have the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex been fully and effectively accommodated?
Do not need to meet each prong
Any one prong of the three-part test, if met, demonstrates compliance with Title IX
Cohen v. Brown University (1992)
The university, needing to cut its budget, eliminated university funding for men’s golf and water polo and women’s gymnastics and volleyball.
Brown challenged Cohen’s argument that women were interested enough in sport opportunities to offer a proportionate number of sport programs.
Case was regarded as a victory for women because the First Circuit Court of Appeals took the position that Title IX meant that equal representation for women in sports had to be proportionate to the student body population.
1996 Clarification
Reiterated that three-part test is really three individual ways to comply with Title IX
Prong 1: Substantial proportionality is an issue only if there are enough athletes to sustain a team.
Prong 2: To meet this, school must continually expand opportunities in response to women’s interests.
Prong 3: School must effectively accommodate interests and abilities of admitted and enrolled students.
Separate Teams
Schools may sponsor teams for members of one sex.
If selection is based on athletic skill
If sport is a contact sport
There is no contact sport exception.
Contact sports, even if predominantly male, are still considered under prong 1.
Cutting Teams
Cutting men’s teams is allowed under prong 1 of the three-part test.
Done to bring number of male participants into substantial proportionality with number of female participants
Not favored
Miami University Wrestling Club v. Miami University (2002)
MU student population in 1997: 55% female students, 47% female student-athletes
Men sued after university cut four men’s teams.
Court dismissed their complaint because members of overrepresented sex (men) do not have a claim under the three-part test.
Cutting Teams
Equity in Athletics v. Department of Education (2011)
Fourth Circuit found that an advocacy group may have standing to sue the federal government because its members are former athletes and the universities made the cuts to male teams to comply with federal law.
This is still the only case to allow men to bring a claim based on lost opportunity, despite COVID-19 cuts.
Cutting Women’s Teams
Men from cut teams have never won a lawsuit against a school.
Cutting of women’s teams is never allowed because women tend to be the underrepresented sex.
Existence of a women’s team is evidence of interest and ability.
Roberts v. Colorado State Board of Agriculture (1993)
In response to disproportionate numbers of women participating, the university cut one women’s team and one men’s team.
Women sued.
Court ordered school to reinstate women’s team.
Recent Guidance
Additional clarification, 2005
Allows for Internet surveys to show interests and abilities and meet third prong of three-part test
Counts nonresponse as lack of interest, but school must receive 85% response level to proceed
Disclosure of Information
Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (1998)
Requires all universities that receive federal student aid and have athletic programs to disclose information related to financial aid, athletic revenues, and other resources
Title VII
Prohibits discrimination against any employee based on sex in compensation and other benefits associated with employment
Plaintiff must merely show some negative job action (e.g., termination) that was taken based on the employee’s sex
By the Numbers
Equal Pay Act
Prohibits discrimination in wages between employees based on sex for equal work on jobs that require equal skill, effort, and responsibility under similar working conditions
Equal work
Two jobs do not have to require identical skill, effort, and responsibility.
The jobs must be substantially equal except for the fact that one employee is paid more even though he or she performs what is basically the same job.
Sexual Harassment
Title IX covers sexual harassment in educational settings.
Quid pro quo harassment involves sexual favors requested in exchange for benefits or educational or employment opportunity.
Hostile environment interferes with ability to perform.
Risk Management Implications
Failure to comply with Title IX can be costly to institution.
Financial burdens
Image of institution
Satisfaction of participants
Coaches and administrators
Sexual harassment
Lawsuits involving EPA and Title VII
