Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne
for UIC types only:
If you observed this, or had a verifiable report, how would you handle this with the umpire in question?
|
Depends on the immediate options.
1) If I have a replacement immediately available, he sits. At least until we have a conversation that leads me to believe he understands that is unacceptable.
2) If I have no immediately available replacement, he finishes the day. Still going to try to have that conversation between games; if not possible, before he leaves. If not then, before he ever gets the chance to work another day.
3) If he doesn't get it, he doesn't work again. Period.
4) If the TD (my customer) wants him gone regardless the result of the conversation, the customer is always right.
We are in a customer service job. I use the following comparison when umpires question how much power the TD or coaches have, or should have:
If you walk into the local Waffle House/Huddle House/IHOP/Applebees/etc, where you have been before, are greeted by the hostess, and you tell the hostess there is a specific server you have had before, and wish to sit at ANY OTHER area, what would you do, as a paying customer, if that hostess told you that you had to sit in that server's area, just because it was his/her turn, or their policy? Would you even pause to ask to speak to the manager first, or would you simply get up and go to another restaurant?
That's pretty much the relationship umpire associations or UIC's have with the TD's. There's always someone else they can use if your service isn't customer friendly. I'm NOT saying bend over, I'm saying that customer service is a necessary part of what we do; the customer has to be really out of line to not be the primary concern. The very nature of officiating is inherently adverserial; we have to sell our customer service despite that automatic bias. We certainly need to support our umpires in their calls, following the rules, etc; but how they deal with the customer makes or breaks their ability to be effective.