The 15 players on the Dartmouth College men’s basketball team fit the definition of employees and have the right to form a union, a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) official ruled Monday.

The 25-page ruling is the latest on the thorny legal issue of whether student athletes at colleges can unionize. In 2015, the NLRB rejected a bid by Northwestern University football players to unionize, but on narrow grounds that left open the prospect for other teams to do so.

The ruling found that the teammates are employees of the college, a key decision if they are to unionize.

“Because Dartmouth has the right to control the work performed by the Dartmouth men’s basketball team, and the players perform that work in exchange for compensation, I find that the petitioned-for basketball players are employees within the meaning of the (National Labor Relations) Act,” wrote Laura A. Sacks, Boston regional director of the NLRB.

In an email issued Tuesday morning, Dartmouth College said it will appeal the decision to the NLRB.

Spokeswoman Diana Lawrence said costs of Dartmouth College athletics far exceeds program revenues. She also stressed that the college does not provide athletic scholarships, only scholarships based on financial need.

“Dartmouth has a long and proud history of productive relationships with unions on campus, always negotiates in good faith when appropriate, and respects the rights of workers to unionize. However, we do not believe these students are employees,” Lawrence wrote.

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which obtained signed union authorization cards from the players, hailed the decision.

“This is an historic step forward for economic justice, racial justice, and union rights — not just for college athletes but millions of young people across our country whose work is not valued like it should be,” said Mary Kay Henry, SEIU president.

The players, she said, represent one of the most pro-union generations in American history.

Christopher Peck, president of SEIU Local 560, said the local will support the player in any appeal to the NLRB.

The college had insisted the players were not employees and no different from other students such as musicians, actors, journalists and members of club-sport teams who have responsibilities at the college.

Dartmouth guard Romeo Myrthil, middle, forward Brandon Mitchell-Day, left, and forward Jackson Munro, right, break up from a huddle during a pause in play with Westfield at Leede Arena in Hanover on Nov. 16, 2023. Myrthil is one of three players the team chose to speak about their unionization effort. (Valley News/James M. Patterson)

But in the ruling, Sacks pointed to many factors that make them employees:

• The basketball program generates revenue for the college.

• The college exercises significant control over their work.

• The players can provide basketball services to the college only.

• The student handbook “in many ways functions as an employee handbook” by laying down rules the players must follow.

• Coaching staff controls the time of practice, play, film review and alumni engagement.

• The athletes receive compensation such as basketball shoes, tickets to games, an early read on scholarships, sports psychology counseling, sports medicine, integrated health and wellness.

Sacks also rejected arguments that a more appropriate bargaining unit would entail all Ivy League schools.

She called for an election, which will be held by secret ballot at the college’s Human Resources Department. The union and college will have to agree upon a date for the election.

Sacks gave Dartmouth until Wednesday, Feb. 7, to provide a list of eligible athlete-employees and noted the law requires Dartmouth to post notice of the election.

Dartmouth has 10 days to file an appeal with the full NLRB, but the election can still move forward.

The Dartmouth team’s overall record is 5-14, and their next game is Saturday afternoon at Harvard University.