Umpire arrested at HS baseball game

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

You mean a replacement?

I would know that before I got to the field because I always comminicated with my partner the day before or the day of(Parking, where we dress, what time will you be there, plate first if doing a DH, etc) I never had a situation where I did not know the name of my partner before I got to the school.

Never? Wow. Sweet. Charmed life and all.

90% (maybe more) of the time, I know who I'm working with in advance. But not 100%. Things happen. Last minute changes happen ... and sometimes I'm that last minute change.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Never? Wow. Sweet. Charmed life and all.

90% (maybe more) of the time, I know who I'm working with in advance. But not 100%. Things happen. Last minute changes happen ... and sometimes I'm that last minute change.

And you live in Texas. In the Midwest I cannot imagine that number is more like 50% when you consider all the weather, conference rules to accommodate weather changes and games played in the morning on Spring Break to play a double header, but it rains that morning instead. There is a reason teams from the Midwest go to Florida, Arizona and Texas for a week just to get some games in for their players.

Peace

[Publius]

I work games in Michigan.

The leagues hire assignors, who are state-association certified. I do not care who shows up as my partner; it's not my concern. Before assignors were hired, I paid attention, but the state association and the member schools chose to not respect the rights of an independent contractor, so I chose not to take on the responsibilities of ascertaining the certification of my partners.

If they tried to discipline me for working with an unregistered partner whom I had no role in hiring, I would sue just for principle and fun. It's hard to hold people to adhesion contracts.

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Never? Wow. Sweet. Charmed life and all.

90% (maybe more) of the time, I know who I'm working with in advance. But not 100%. Things happen. Last minute changes happen ... and sometimes I'm that last minute change.

Yeah, I have had last minute changes. My assigner texts, emails or calls to tell me the change.

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by Publius

I work games in Michigan.

The leagues hire assignors, who are state-association certified. I do not care who shows up as my partner; it's not my concern. Before assignors were hired, I paid attention, but the state association and the member schools chose to not respect the rights of an independent contractor, so I chose not to take on the responsibilities of ascertaining the certification of my partners.

If they tried to discipline me for working with an unregistered partner whom I had no role in hiring, I would sue just for principle and fun. It's hard to hold people to adhesion contracts.

I agree it should not be your responsibility. However, I would find great pleasure in busting a deadbeat who refused to register. The guy who does not play by the rules and register is not one of us.

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by Robmoz

Per the MHSAA Officials Guidebook:


UNREGISTERED OFFICIALS
Registered officials are never to work with anyone who does not hold current MHSAA registration in the sport. While it is the responsibility of the host school in particular and all schools in general to use only currently registered officials in those positions which require MHSAA registered officials (“Who Must Register,” page 3), each contracted official has a responsibility and obligation to assure that he/she works only with MHSAA registered officials.

If it is learned that an unregistered person is present to function as an official, the MHSAA registered official shall:
1) advise the host
2) remind the host that no MHSAA registered official may work any part of a contest with an unregistered person
3) delay the start of the contest until a replacement is provided
4) work the contest only with the registered officials present with the mutual consent of all schools
5) postpone the contest.

It is never an option to accept or use the services of an unregistered official.

This sounds like union/state bullying to me. If you ain't a dues paying member, you ain't getting any games. I'm sure they have couched this rule as to avoid Michigan's new "Right to work" law. Either that or its a case of OBB (over-beaurocrating beaurocrats).

In Texas, we're in the middle of a battle over control of officiating between our state and union. The state's no registration/no games edict has been on hold for years now awaiting a court battle that is probably eating away at our union's coffers. Probably will be a case of whoever has the deeper pockets wins.

[CT1]

Originally Posted by bluehair

The state's no registration/no games edict has been on hold for years now awaiting a court battle that is probably eating away at our union's coffers. Probably will be a case of whoever has the deeper pockets wins.

I'm betting on the state, in that case.

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by bluehair

This sounds like union/state bullying to me. If you ain't a dues paying member, you ain't getting any games. I'm sure they have couched this rule as to avoid Michigan's new "Right to work" law. Either that or its a case of OBB (over-beaurocrating beaurocrats).

In Texas, we're in the middle of a battle over control of officiating between our state and union. The state's no registration/no games edict has been on hold for years now awaiting a court battle that is probably eating away at our union's coffers. Probably will be a case of whoever has the deeper pockets wins.

I think it had more to do with Background checks and clinics. I was not a member of a union and never would join one. I do not want my salary determined by the competence of my laziest co-worker.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bluehair

This sounds like union/state bullying to me. If you ain't a dues paying member, you ain't getting any games. I'm sure they have couched this rule as to avoid Michigan's new "Right to work" law. Either that or its a case of OBB (over-beaurocrating beaurocrats).

In Texas, we're in the middle of a battle over control of officiating between our state and union. The state's no registration/no games edict has been on hold for years now awaiting a court battle that is probably eating away at our union's coffers. Probably will be a case of whoever has the deeper pockets wins.

I have to disagree with that. Most states require those to work and their public high schools and private high schools to have a license or a minimum requirement to work games. The situation in Texas is unique and not applicable to most states. I live in a large population state and you could not work a game with any IHSA member school if you do not have a license. And it has nothing to do with unions or "right to work" issues. They just require you to be qualified by passing a series of steps to work those games and to be around kids. It think that is only fair and just in this very litigious society. After all most of these are non-for-profit private organizations, not public organizations that have to allow someone or anyone to work in that group without some standards being set. And I doubt seriously this would be a legal battle that they would lose as most things require some minimal standard to participate when a license is at play.

Peace

[qcumpire]

I would never knowingly work with someone who is not licensed by the IHSA. One worry I would have is whether or not my supplemental medical and liability insurance would be voided by working with someone who is not licensed.

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by qcumpire

i would never knowingly work with someone who is not licensed by the ihsa. One worry i would have is whether or not my supplemental medical and liability insurance would be voided by working with someone who is not licensed.

++1!

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bluehair

This sounds like union/state bullying to me. If you ain't a dues paying member, you ain't getting any games. I'm sure they have couched this rule as to avoid Michigan's new "Right to work" law. Either that or its a case of OBB (over-beaurocrating beaurocrats).

In Texas, we're in the middle of a battle over control of officiating between our state and union. The state's no registration/no games edict has been on hold for years now awaiting a court battle that is probably eating away at our union's coffers. Probably will be a case of whoever has the deeper pockets wins.

It's not a union. Don't call it a union, even in your thoughts. If they unionize, it would change a crapload of things ... it's an association.

In any case - union/state bullying? Nonsense. Requiring the official to have passed tests and received training? Absolutely.

[jwwashburn]

State Union for HS Baseball officials would mean no one under the age of 40 would be allowed to watch a playoff game..much less work one

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by CT1

I'm betting on the state, in that case.

Well ... as my other post said, it's not a union... but technically it's also not the state. It's the UIL --- a technicality perhaps, but their pockets are infinite.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by qcumpire

I would never knowingly work with someone who is not licensed by the IHSA. One worry I would have is whether or not my supplemental medical and liability insurance would be voided by working with someone who is not licensed.

It wouldn't. After all you are not responsible for who you work with as Michigan states.

Peace