Thread: MEN OR WOMEN
View Single Post
  #43 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 14, 2003, 11:24am
JRutledge JRutledge is offline
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,520
Quote:
Originally posted by fletch_irwin_m
Three basic problem's with your argument.
The first is assuming that what is right is legal and what is legal is right. These often can be polar opposites.
The second is that the UM lawyers lost their argument. The court ruled that you can not give points based on race. Just as you can not give points based on religion or gender. Constitutionally you ARE allowed to give points for being from the UP or for being left handed if you want to.
Finally, the courts have never ruled SPECIFICALLY on Affirmative Action.
The bottom line is, in line with this thread, officiating, as with any other job starts with who you know. If you are friends with a supervisor, you are probably going to get looks that you may not get if you are not "networked". A great addage I have found to be fairly accurate "WHO you knows can get you a job, but WHAT you know can keep your job."
I really do not want to debate all the merits of Affirmative Action or not, mainly because I do not have all the necessary facts in front of me. But the Backey vs Cal-Berkeley was a case about Affirmative Acton. There was also another one dealing with the University of Texas, which are cited as decisions against "Affirmative Action." So there have been cases besides this one in considering "Affirmative Action" practices.

Actually I am with Official Hommie on this one, I just think there are other factors where race/gender play a factor, but we look the other way. Race, just like what region you are from makes a difference in whether you get hired or not. If you live in Chicago, you are much more likely to get hired as a D1 Officials (different sports too) than if you live in Colchester, Illinois. Mainly because the official that lives in Colchester is not near a major airport and the official in the Chicago area is. I only want to say that merit seems to be a small part in making a decision, if it is based on merit at all. And when you talk about merit, who is making the decision on what is valued as an official and what is not? And if I am the assignor, I can use any criteria that I choose as long as the officials are doing the job. That might not be the same thing that everyone can come to an agreement on but if I am making the decisions, everyone's opinion is not an issue. Which happen in our region with many D1 Officials when a new assignor came into the conferences that they worked. Many were not asked back.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote