A lobbyist for the Jockeys’ Guild warned that Churchill Downs Inc. may be causing more trouble for itself by suing the guild on antitrust grounds.
Lobbyist Barry Broad said that the Churchill lawsuit — which claims the guild violated antitrust laws by urging jockeys, as independent contractors, to boycott two tracks — could ultimately help the jockeys win their fight to be paid for their media rights.
Broad also questioned whether Churchill itself was violating antitrust laws by the way that it negotiates purses for races with horse owners. “You start bringing in lawyers and you can get hung up on your own price-fixing petard before you know it,” Broad said.
Churchill Downs spokeswoman Julie Koenig Loignon wouldn’t comment on Broad’s remarks.
Churchill filed its suit in Louisville, Ky., federal court earlier this month, seeking an injunction prohibiting the Jockeys’ Guild from directing future boycotts and claiming that the guild violated antitrust laws by encouraging independent contractors to walk out at Churchill Downs and Hoosier Park in 2004. Independent contractors are prohibited from engaging in concerted work actions under the Sherman Act.
Broad said that he believes jockeys are employees of the track, but that “if they are independent contractors, [Churchill] needs a contract to buy their media rights.”
Rick Alberts, a Los Angeles labor lawyer who represents employers, agreed that a declaration that jockeys are independent contractors could give them “a stronger argument” that they should be paid for their media rights.
