Update: “Judge tosses suit from caddies who claimed they were ‘human billboards'”

Following up on a post from a year ago: “Caddies lost their class-action lawsuit against the PGA Tour when a federal judge in California ruled they signed a contract with the tour that requires them to wear bibs as part of their uniform and cannot claim that corporate sponsorship on the bibs makes them human billboards.” [AP/Fox]


  • Damn. From the title I thought the article was more about Coupe De Villes and Escalades, not golf.

    What I don’t understand is why the caddies don’t simply organize a union. The suit seems to be ridiculous, given that the caddies signed contracts allowing the PGA to do what it does, i.e., make them human billboards.

    • Allan,

      The reason the caddies don’t unionize is simple. While they have to sign a contract with the PGA to work tour events, they aren’t actually employed by or paid by the PGA. Each caddie works for and is paid by one specific golfer.

      Collective bargaining doesn’t(can’t) work in a one on one employment situation.

  • Funny. I always thought that the caddies were employees of the player not the PGA. If so wouldn’t their complaint be against the players?

  • Give the caddies a cut of the fees the sponsors pay to the PGA Tour – problem solved!

  • Um. the caddies can unionize, even if they are employed by a single golfer. Baseball players are employed by separate teams, yet they have one union. Same with football and basketball players…I think janitors in LA have a union, although they are employed by a number of employers…And NY and SF taxi drivers might be unionizing, also.

    So, I am not sure that caddies cannot unionize.

    • There’s a big difference between team sports players, the other groups you mention and the caddies.

      In all the other cases you mention while there are multiple employers, each employer has multiple employees.

      The problem for the caddies unionizing is that each employer only employs one caddie.

      Name any existing case where a union exists where one employer employs only one union member. I don’t think you can find any.