First of all, happy Labor Day out there.

I can’t believe it’s the end of summer already. But let’s not talk the end of summer, instead, let’s talk about the potential end of a really problematic employer-worker relationship that has plagued professional wrestling for many, many decades, but seemingly worse the past few.

The point is, back in the day, wrestlers as independent contractors worked for a variety of promotions, revolving rather regularly, and were paid for their work. They were seen on TV in many instances, but back then, TV meant mostly regional airing.

Today, and for the past few decades, working as a wrestler no longer means concentrating on a particular region for months or years. It means toiling under the control of one nationwide (and global) promotion, doing their bidding, playing by their rules, and ultimately ceding a lot of rights and income potential to that controlling interest.

In a recent LA Times piece, Cyndia Zwahlen states, “Generally, if work done by a person is under the control of the employer, then that person is considered an employee.

This appears to be an open-and-shut case, and a recent ruling in California seems to have further defined the issue.

The question for now and for the future of professional wrestling isn’t so much about when this will all play out, but how.

It seems to me that we’re probably not going to find an industry that starts employing wrestlers, because that would likely lead to unionization and a lot of big headaches. While the financial hit would be significant, and the benefits accrued obviously well deserved, the problem with a union of wrestlers would be a problem of creativity.

Of course, that’s a joke in and of itself when it comes to TNA or WWE.

But for the fans, do we really want to see more “even-steven” booking? Do we really want to see ‘to the second’ endings of matches, that keep all the talent unified and happy?

But the reality of health benefits should be a welcome one by fans.

On the other hand, what if the WWE is forced to truly acknowledge an “Independent Contractor” status? Would that bring about better things for all? The key there would be whether the big names force certain benefits into contracts. The problem as has been the case since Jesse Ventura unsuccessfully attempted to get Hogan in the mix, is that the big names don’t want to sacrifice for the smaller names.

Where’s Bruno Sammartino when you need him?

The scary thing is, that “independent contractors” as individuals have very little power. And the history and nature of professional wrestlers don’t suggest much opportunity for banding together, only divide and conquer.

While we could see a situation where guys negotiate short term contracts and renegotiate -- or leave for greener pastures -- after each one, that would only create an atmosphere where the WWE (or TNA) would be extremely mindful of putting people over.

Of course, “Loser Leaves Town” matches may suddenly make more sense, and be more interesting and popular.

The key question is this: would a strong definition of “independent contractor” status be something that could help TNA grow from distant second to big two power? Would it be something that could allow ROH to showcase some guys who could go to the WWE or TNA for a few months, get a name, and come back and build up the promotion?

That’s the question that the WWE has to explore -- whether it would be better to hire wrestlers full time and lock them up, or play by a defined contractor status and most likely find themselves in a situation where talent can move more freely, get better opportunities and play the promotions off against each other.

Either way, the road ahead looks complicated.

Joe Babinsack can be reached at [email protected].

Lots of DVDs, a few books, and even some MMA on the way.