First Louisiana now Mississippi

[so cal lurker]

I think it is pretty easy to argue there is a basis for *some* differential -- comp for a game essentially includes time to get ready -- making sure the uniform and gear is ready, getting dressed, stretched, in the mind set, travel time (not just the mileage) and so forth. Much more efficient economically to do a double header than to do games on two separate nights. (I'm not *remotely* arguing that a double-header paying only 141% of a single game (55 vs 78) makes sense, only that there is some logic to getting paid more if having to make the effort for a single game -- and it sure sounds better to think about it as extra for doing only one game instead of less for the second game of a double header.) What "some" *is* reasonable I won't attempt to define.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

I think it is pretty easy to argue there is a basis for *some* differential -- comp for a game essentially includes time to get ready -- making sure the uniform and gear is ready, getting dressed, stretched, in the mind set, travel time (not just the mileage) and so forth. Much more efficient economically to do a double header than to do games on two separate nights. (I'm not *remotely* arguing that a double-header paying only 141% of a single game (55 vs 78) makes sense, only that there is some logic to getting paid more if having to make the effort for a single game -- and it sure sounds better to think about it as extra for doing only one game instead of less for the second game of a double header.) What "some" *is* reasonable I won't attempt to define.

While I don't agree with the specific amounts, the concept is valid. You only have to travel to/from the site once regardless of how many games you do. Building the travel amount into the fee is not uncommon and not unreasonable. They could just pay $23 per game regardless of the number then pay $32 for getting there. Again, I think the numbers are off, but not the concept.