What legal claim did the term "student-athlete" aim to avoid?

• A. Workers' compensation claims
• B. Unpaid internships
• C. Antitrust claims
• D. Tax obligations

Answer: (A)

The main idea is to separate athletes from employees in order to limit potential labor-law liabilities. Labeling participants as “student-athletes” keeps them viewed as students rather than workers, so schools avoid the employer-employee relationship that would bring obligations like workers’ compensation for on‑the‑job injuries. If athletes were treated as employees, the school would be responsible for workers’ comp benefits, along with related wage and payroll obligations.

That’s why workers’ compensation claims fit best. The other options don’t align with the purpose of the term: unpaid internships aren’t the focus here since student-athletes receive scholarships, antitrust claims involve market practices rather than status for injury benefits, and tax obligations would apply regardless of how athletes are labeled.