2 person varsity crews this year
 

I have heard that Iowa will be using 2 person crews for some lower level varsity games this year. This is entirely due to a lack of officials in our state. I thought that was pretty sad that we’re having to do that after being 3 person for so long. I wonder if game fees will stay the same or if we’ll get an increased cut because we’re splitting it between 2 rather than 3.

Honestly, I see botn sides. Why should the schools pay the same to get lesser coverage? Why should the officials do more work and not get paid more?

I'm done working 2. I'd retire first.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

I feel bad for our assignor because I’ll bet he will deal with a lot of guys that think they’re too good to go work 2 man small school. He does a great job of mixing it up so it’s not the same 7 or 8 crews working all the big school games. Honestly, I don’t think working 2 man will be that bad because a lot of those teams that will get 2 man crews play much slower than a 3A or 4A team. It will be an interesting year for sure though.

It's a step backwards. I'd rather promote lower level officials to fill 3-person crews or have a JV person stay to work with 2 varsity officials.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

If I weren't 38 and now living in Rhode Island, I'd be right there with you. :D

Theoretically, I completely agree. But ADs always seem to get 51% of the vote.

With the officials shortage, this may be inevitable in more and more places. If so, I hope the expectation is that there is judicious decision-making on which games get which sized crews, not necessarily based on school size and division, but more so on the standings (which admittedly can be arbitrary in early December but are certainly very important come mid-January).

Truthfully....and Rich, you know this with some of your schools....not every varsity game truly needs three officials. That should be our goal of course....but if we're stuffed into a corner by circumstance, we know which games we'd cut the third official from.

Note: All of this is easier said than done in a long-term contracting state like Wisconsin.

Or those officials don't want to work 2-man or don't think those games are worth leaving their house for. It's not always about thinking "they're too good".

I don’t know many that want to work 2 man. It’s usually bad basketball.

Exactly.

I'm glad I don't work in a single assigner system where saying no to a game like this means the rest of my schedule will suffer.

I assign 24 schools and I have only had one game run with two officials in the last few years. Last minute death in the family and too late to get another official.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Agreed! That way the JV officials can get varsity experience, and get comfortable with varsity level games before being promoted to the varsity staff full-time.

I also think that using 2-person for varsity games is nonsense, because the athletes are too big, fast, and strong for the officials to get into credible calling positions if there are only 2 of them. That is why I have joined groups that use 3-person for their varsity games as a dual-board member.

The schools that will get 2 man are absolutely not too big and fast for an official to keep up. It is BAD basketball. A lot of 20-16 final scores, just slow and bad basketball. It’s not fun but every crew gets these teams once or twice a year.

And true independent contractors could say no to 2-person assignments without reprisal. Guessing that won't be the case for your group.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That is true in my area. I don’t mind doing it a few times a year though because our assignor does a great job of getting everyone quality games as well. We’ll see if that holds true as my kids get older, I may decide the time away from my family isn’t worth going to a town of 1500 doing these games. For now it’s fine for me.

Maybe they do not like the coverage of 2-person in that level of game. Anything that happens is not going to be like the scrutiny is going away. I would try to work at other levels that I am already working. We are independent contractors. when schools realize we do not have to leave our house for what is below a standard we have set, the better off everyone will be.

Also, some people have the desire to work higher level and more athletic basketball. That is a preference. It is not like we are getting rich doing this or making a D1 salary for a couple of hours. I think enjoying what you do is just as important as what level you do.

Peace

That’s a great way to look at it. I personally don’t enjoy lower level varsity basketball, or high school girls for that matter. I’d love to act as an independent contractor and not take games I don’t want. Unfortunately in our area it doesn’t work like that. We have one assignor who assigns for like 90 high schools in central and southern Iowa. I can think of about 3 schools that don’t use him and contract their own games. You can’t exactly turn back games and expect him to keep using you, no matter how desperate he is for people. If you want games in this area, you work what he gives you. As I mentioned, he does a great job of only putting you on a couple of those shitty games every season so you just kind of take your lumps. If you took your line of thinking in our area, you wouldn’t be doing much high school ball. I won’t do college ball because it’s too much time away from my family. I enjoy doing good high school ball and am fine recognizing that sometimes in life things aren’t perfect.

I understand, trust me I do. Obviously, officials are making a choice. And that choice is not to work at all. What does that get us? Now these actions are taken. And if the smaller school are going to 2 person, there are likely to be officials that are like me, like Rich and like some others that might say, "Forget this, I am staying home."


Well, where I live we have more than enough officials and games to work in basketball. I can decide who to work for, I can decide what level not to work. And most of all maybe this is why officials all over the country are losing officials. I know in some other sports there were assignors trying to make people feel they had to do things, and now they are losing numbers and having to scramble for officials. The point I am making is that we can act like we have no choices, but it appears when people decide not to work that sport anymore, they are making a choice. You just have to know who you are in this game.

Peace

I always think the idea of "we're independent contractors" is a bunch of hogwash, something that's only true in form and little in substance. Of course, that largely depends on the state, but overall as a profession I believe that is the case. There are multiple feuds going on with low-level college assigners in my area, to the extent that some assigners are saying "do not work for x assigner or you will not work for me." That is the definition of not being an IC, and that's just one example. Of course, assigners are ICs, as well, and can pretty much use or not use an official for any reason they choose. Where the line is drawn is not something I know (not a lawyer).

With respect to this topic, I guess I consider myself lucky to be in a state like SC where all varsity games come out of Columbia. The booking office goes as far down the rating list as it has to in order to fill every varsity DH with 3-person crews, even if that means the #600 official (out of ~750 statewide) gets an assignment. Don't get me wrong, the way things are done here is antiquated and illogical, but it does prevent a shortage to the extent that we'd have to go to 2-person varsity DHs.

And I'm like Rich. I would quit before regularly working 2-person varsity, if we ever got to that point.

Yep. I've been in association ("district" in SC) meetings where we are told that working subvarsity games (99% 2-person) is "required" or else our rating will suffer (which affects varsity assignments and postseason). Declining or turning back games here results (or is supposed to result) in lost rating points.

You cannot force me to work when I block the date, and I don't have to give you an explanation for why I block a date. If it's because I don't want to leave my job or my family to work subvarsity basketball, that is my prerogative and not your business. Too many people don't understand that.

When I say that I am speaking from a state perspective. No one can require me or any officials to do anything. I can even give back games that I choose to not work. Now will that have other consequences? Sure. But when you say I must work on a Saturday or a Friday at a certain time, you have no right to tell me to do anything for many reasons. It is our internal goals or expectations that we do things we might not want to do. We have to just own that, but if you refuse what are they going to do to you?

Even as a college official, no one tells me what to make available. They ask for a reason early what we can do. If we leave few dates available, then the consequence might be we may not get many games, but they cannot make you do anything in the end. n varsity, if we ever got to that point.

And I can tell you that as a multiple sports official, the schools better make some changes or they might not have officials at all for certain games. Part of the shortage was on the schools, not even the assignors. Right now football everyone moved to Friday when there used to be Saturday games a lot. And the schools do not want to have schools open on Saturday. Well if they do not change that, they will not have games at all because they will not have anyone to do their games. Move the nights and the times, they will have plenty of officials available. Just because you do what always worked is not going to help the situation.

Peace

Right, and my comment wasn’t intended to be directed at you. In states like yours and Rich’s where each conference hires its own assigner, I’m sure there is much more of an independent contractor “vibe,” versus states like mine and surrounding which have much different assigning structures that are more restrictive but the powers-that-be still claim that we are “independent contractors.”

Not at all saying I want to be classified as an employee of an assigner or state association, just saying that in many states, officials are treated more like employees than ICs with respect to the letter of the law despite what state associations call them.

Is It The Good Economy ???
 

Our fall training class for new applicants has several openings. It's usually filled to capacity by mid-summer.

During the recession of 2008-09 we were turning away dozens of applicants that wanted to be officials.

Most of CA uses 2-man on varsity games, including the big schools (between 2500 & 3000 kids), plus there is a shot clock.
It is not that difficult to work these contests and this is not bad basketball. The officials have to be in shape and run to obtain proper positions for plays.
I've worked both 2-man and 3-man varsity over the years and don't grasp the prima donna attitude of those who will only work 3-man. 2-man isn't that much different if you have two officials who can move.

Maybe those officials are guys who want to work in the playoffs, where it is 3-man only, college officials who are used to working 3-man more than 2-man, or officials who sincerely believe that 3-man is a superior system than 2-man, and refuse to work 2-man, so that they don't compromise their play calling percentages. 3-man is simpler, but it requires a greater level of discipline than 2-person, so I would be more concerned about 2-person only officials (with exception to those such as BillyMac, who work in areas with limited regular season 3-person opportunities).

Nevadaref, is it specifically your area of California that mostly uses 2-man, or a statewide thing? AFAIK, the Desert Valley Basketball Officials Association, and quite a few of the Northern California associations use 3-man for regular season games, enough so that Greg Austin, the owner of the A Better Official YouTube channel and website, has to make some videos about 3-person officiating. Maybe 3-man is also widespread in Southern California as well. It's been a little more than 10 years since I lived in the Golden State, so I'm not up to speed with how things are done there.
Is Nevada mostly 2-man, a mix of 2 and 3-man, or all 3-man at the varsity level?

Northern CA is mostly 2-man. Several leagues in the Bay Area use 3, but almost all other varsity games are 2-man, including Sacramento. I don't know much about SoCal, but can't imagine that there are enough officials to cover all the games with 3-man crews.

Nevada uses 3-man at the varsity level for the two largest classifications and 2-man for the varsity games at the smallest two classes.

The Weakest Link ...
 

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I love the physical and mental challenge of a two person game. I love to sweat, the more the better. I want to be able to wring the sweat out of my black undershirt after every single game. Every single game, regardless of the interscholastic level, the gender, the matchup, or my partner, excites me. I get an adrenaline rush from the challenge to try to work a perfect game. And this happens to me every single night that I'm out there.

That being said, I'm pretty sure that the game of basketball is much better officiated when there are three officials.

Starting from the highest levels of basketball, the professional level, and moving downward through college, high school varsity, high school junior varsity, high school freshman, middle school, travel teams, and recreation leagues, is there some point at which it's definite that three officials aren't needed, or should there be three officials for every basketball game except the one in my driveway?

When the day comes (and it will soon) when I physically can't work a two person game, it will be time from me to hang up my whistle, it won't be time to look for the help of two other officials to keep working. I will not (physically) be the weakest link. I love the sport too much (player, coach, official), it's been great to me, it deserves better. I can still observe and train novice officials when it's time for me to hang up my whistle. Or can just sell raffle tickets at the door of our monthly board meetings. Anything to help the cause.

Old soldiers never die; they just fade away. (General Douglas MacArthur, 1951)

I will put it plain and simple. When you know better, you do better. I simply do not have to work 2-person anymore and will not. The Chicago Public Schools hire 2 officials for many of their games. I simply will not work them unless it is a 3 person game. I do not have to and do not need to at this stage of my career. I will take a college game for much more pay and fewer people on purpose than work a 2 person varsity game. All the other conferences assign 3 person crews for all their varsity games. Call it what you wish. I also do not go a lot of things in officiating, because I do not have to. I know my worth and what I choose to do when I leave my house.

Someone told me a long time ago, "When you leave your house and you are dreading why you are leaving your house, it is time to change something." Well for me I will not work 2 person games or work men's leagues. And when I have to, then I will do something else. And obviously many people are choosing to do something else and we have many areas hurting for bodies.

Peace

After 30 years of officiating, I will spend my time doing what I wish.

I feel I'm not as good going back and forth. So I will work 3. Only a few conferences don't hire 3 here and it's easy to simply not work those.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The other side of the independent contractor arrangement is that the assignor doesn't have to offer you any games either. That is not unlike a plumber who refuses to all but one type of job. They certainly have that right, but eventually people quit calling them.

Too many areas restrict assignments to few...or one person. That person has way too much power and is way more of an employer than one who contracts with officials.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Well if you work for only one guy or association, that might be the case (Which sounds like the problem here for most. And we wonder why there is a shortage?). I have accepted games for this coming year for over 10 people and that is not everyone I could work for. So if one does not like the restrictions or expectations I set for myself, then someone else can use me, trust me on that one. One assignor does not give a darn what someone else expects to work in their conference, they hire who they want and makes them look good. And there are assignors because of their stubbornness get replaced all the time. Even the people I work for have their individual expectations and standards too. And some I will not work for because it is not worth it to me. I am willing to travel too, but not if you do not respect my concerns. And what is funny these are often never discussed, I just do not go anywhere for a lot of reasons.

Peace

Billy, I'd say that house league rec games up to the 8th grade level and middle school games do not need 3 officials. This is because the ability level of the players and officials working these games is too low for 3-person crews to benefit the game.

Freshman games can be adequately covered by 2-person crews, because freshman players are often slightly better than middle school players in terms of skills and athleticism. If freshman and JV games are played at the same location, but in order, and not at the same time, and the members of the freshman crew agree, a JV official can join them to practice 3-person mechanics. However, freshman games will be scheduled as 2-person games.

I would prefer to have junior varsity games covered by 3-person crews, to give JV officials practice with 3-person mechanics before they move up to varsity, and because JV teams often have some players who could be playing on the varsity team. JV teams will be playing a similar style to their varsity team, so officials can get used to the off-ball coverage that they will need to employ for their varsity games. The level of play will be higher than at the freshman level, with some teams comparable to varsity teams, so it would make sense to introduce 3-person mechanics consistently at this level. This may be the reason why some states, including South Carolina, set a pay scale for 3 JV officials, even though almost all subvarsity games use 2 officials, because they expect that 3 officials might occasionally cover a JV game.

Varsity games must use 3 officials, because the athletes tend to be too fast, big, and strong to be adequately covered by 2 officials. This is especially true for boys games. Off-ball coverage is critical in varsity games, because the teams use offenses that feature heavy doses of screens, cutting, motion, and/or post play, on its own or to set up outside shots, and opposing teams will use any tactics possible to defend this, including illegal tactics. 3-person crews are better at off-ball coverage than 2-person crews, because each official has a smaller area of coverage to focus on, and will not have to look across the court to locate the ball as in 2-person. 3-person crews can also rotate to balance the coverage in ways that a 2-person crew cannot. Because varsity teams can play quickly in transition, a 2-person crew can easily be caught out of position by a quick change of possession, where only 1 official might be in the frontcourt (the former trail/new lead) in a hybrid L/C position. A 3-person crew would have at least the Old T/New L and the C to hold down the fort while the Old L/New T returns to the proper side of the court. 3-person crews are also better in terms of press coverage than a 2-person crew, because the Lead does not have to split the difference between L responsibilities (be even with the last defender) and C responsibilities (stay with the middle wave of players) as he would in a 2-person crew. These reasons are why some states, such as Florida, mandate at least a certain amount of 3-person games in the regular season (3 home games per gender for each school), and others are exclusively 3-person for varsity regular season games (Georgia, NC,SC,VA, and others).

For non-scholastic games, I would recommend 3-person starting at the 8th grade level for travel games, at the high school level for house league rec games, and for any men's league games. This are because travel players, especially 8th graders and above, play at a more competitive level than rec players of a similar age, and would be disadvantaged from a 2-person crew not being able to be in positions as good as those a 3-person crew could achieve. The high school level rec and men's league games would benefit from having 3 officials because 3-person crews can provide better game management and dead ball officiating than 2-person crews, which is needed for games when tempers might run high and where players may not be evenly matched, to prevent unnecessary activity.

Why would I recommend implementing 3-person at the 8th grade travel, high school level rec ball, men's league, or JV levels? I would do this because these levels are competitive and would benefit from a higher level of officiating than 2-person crews can provide, yet with low enough stakes that officials can make mistakes and learn from them without the negative repercussions to their careers that might follow if they were to make similar mistakes in a varsity game (loss of schedule, low ratings, etc.).

Genders ...
 

Be careful here, or that unmarked black helicopter outside your window may be from the American Civil Liberties Union, or the Title IX police.

Note: We take gender issues very seriously here in my little corner of Connecticut. My local board is being investigated by the federal government for inequalities regarding assignments of male versus female officials. Two plus years. Tons of data. Our insurance company wants to negotiate a settlement, just based on the data, not based on any biased intent.

I just mean that boys tend to run faster than girls, on average, and are usually bigger and stronger (not always). That does not mean that girls varsity games should use 2-person crews, because varsity girls are still bigger, faster, stronger, and more skilled than subvarsity girls. What I wrote is as applicable to girls games as it is to boys games.

It really does not matter what we want or what we think is best. The schools that use 2-man for subvarsity do not care that "subvarsity officials need 3-man experience before moving up to varsity." That is not something the schools give a damn about; unless they see the benefit that we can see as officials, their response will be that someone on the subvarsity crew needs to work for free or the crew needs to split the 2-man fee amongst the three of them.

And quite frankly, a lot of inexperienced (heck, even some veteran) officials just watch the ball, and it's very obvious to even non-officials. The ADs will say, "Why would we pay a third set of eyes to just ball-watch?" And on that point, I would understand their perspective. Sure, we as officials all went through that stage and most newbies grow out of it, but again, the schools don't always see the long-term. I've worked my fair share of 3-man subvarsity and varsity games with officials whose heads move wherever the ball goes; every time coaches/ADs notice that, the argument for paying three officials loses merit in their eyes.

If the high schools in SC wanted to only pay two officials for varsity games, I guarantee you that's what would happen. When the schools are writing the checks, they call the shots. And more often than not, they do not care what we think. Obviously the situation in Iowa is much different due to there actually being a shortage of officials.

You are right, they could do whatever they want. But those decisions have consequences. And if you want to maintain officials to work your games and get the officials you want, then you better make some decisions that do not alienate those groups of officials. And schools have to stop acting like we must go along with them, or they will be in a situation where games will not be played at all because you cannot get officials. Or they will complain of the quality.

We already are not getting officials into the arena to begin with. Keep making it harder for the veterans and you will have them making decisions. They can be stubborn all they want to but their attitude is often the reason people never want to officiate or stay in the early stages.

Peace

Well, I guess I'm glad I don't have to worry about that being an issue here. As far as I know, there aren't any schools wanting to cut back to 2-man for varsity. At least, we never hear about it in meetings or other communications. As long as we have our current rating structure and allow the state office to control varsity assignments, this isn't an issue we will run into. We have quite a few other issues to worry about.

Also, motion to ban the phrase "bigger, faster, stronger" from this forum.

SC Official, I understand your position that it does not matter to the schools what we think is best. My statements on where we need 3-person crews and where we should have 3-person crews are more from a training and development standpoint, and what I would consider good practices for an association varsity development program to have. Perhaps this would be a good starting point for officials associations to negotiate with state association (if varsity assignments are handled through the state), schools/school systems (if individual schools sign contracts with associations), or conferences (for states using that system) on arrangements that would be in the best interests of all involved, including the officials themselves. There are many articles on the shortage of officials and the need for new officials.

However, there are other forms of attrition that no one is paying attention to, and that may be eating away at even the varsity level soon. Older officials will retire. Good high school officials will get picked up at the college level, and if they move up to the Division I level or get hired to work professional basketball, say goodbye to using them for high school assignments. They may be able to stay on as association commissioners (Tony Brothers is the commissioner of Peninsula Basketball Officials Association (IAABO Board 125) in Virginia) or as trainers, but they need to be replaced with quality trained officials at the varsity level. These replacements will be taken from the subvarsity level, so there need to be training programs that associations use for both non-scholastic and scholastic basketball to meet their needs. For instance, if a JV official isn't getting enough 3-person experience from a subvarsity schedule, give him a men's league or travel schedule to get him 3-person experience, preferably with other varsity/college officials who are not assigned that day, so he can learn from better officials as he prepares to make the jump to varsity.

JRutledge, I totally agree with you on being an independent contractor, accepting games from different sources, and schools acting as if officials must follow their lead. I am no longer exclusively a member of Board 12 (and have not been for the past year), but I have been joining other boards, and will have some men's league games, if not varsity games, specifically to work on my 3-person game, get to know college officials, and work with them (Matt Myers uses high school and college officials to work the men's leagues that he assigns).

Would the terms "have better athletic ability" or "too athletic" work better?

Who says no one is paying attention? Everything you just typed is stuff I've been hearing (or reading in this forum) for over a decade.

I don't know if the public (or powers-that-be) have been paying attention. Some associations have varsity development programs, where officials are taught 3-person mechanics, work non-scholastic 3-person games attend dedicated camps, and are evaluated for progress to the varsity level. My modest proposal is just for more associations to implement this, and a more expanded vision of what such programs should look like.

Who are these "powers that be" you speak of? Camps in our state are a required part of our licensing. We must attend camps in our particular sports every three years. In basketball, that involves attending 3 person camps (the only sport that has an on-court requirement on some level). There is nothing in the requirements that require we must work scholastic games. And almost always associations or assignors run these camps. I am a certified clinician in my state and I ran two camps for two different associations. I also attended a camp in another state that ran a camp that was organized by the LOA. This has been the case for over 20 years BTW in Illinois. The structure is a little different, but basically, associations have been running camps almost my entire career. Nothing new or special needs to be shared. Remember you just got into this, some of us have been doing this for years.

Peace

WOW! I found this comment shocking! Did some disgruntled female officials drop a dime with the EEOC? How does this apply to Independent Contractors?

Billy on the Law!

Maybe I should move to IL to work ;). Some associations in MD have got the memo (MBOA conducts a camp every year to evaluate its officials), but MD as a state does not use camps to license officials the way that IL (and other states) do, so training is left to the devices of each local association. VA doesn't appear to have camp requirements either, unless Raymond or the other users from the Commonwealth of Virginia have something else to say. I like what you have described, it just needs to be more widespread.

No Virginia does not. Again, you are not bringing up anything new. People have discussed how involved a state should be before. The VHSL is actually pulling back from oversight of basketball officials. They no longer conduct a state eval camp to select new state tournament officials. And for the state finals and semi-finals, they no longer choose the individual officials themselves. They assign each game to an association and the association chooses whom to send. They used to also have a state level newcomers camp but they ceased that a few years ago.

So what you want in a Utopian national high school landscape is not going to happen. States are going to do their own thing, and they have no reason not to. Public school games only affect that respective state, so why should they care or worry about what other states are doing?

Again, don't get sidetracked. Do you have video of yourself from your last camp?

I don't have video from MBOA camp, because I never worked in the gym that was filmed, but I'll ask Que'z if there was video of me at the Level One Camp. If I can get film from Matt Myers or the leagues that I'll be working in next season, that could also help.

Young’uns Want To Know What Drop A Dime Means …
 

Yes.

At the time there was no "master list" listings the names of varsity officials and listing the names of subvarsity officials. The only way for disgruntled female officials to discover how many females/males received varsity schedules was to observe females/males working a varsity game, or ask around the "grape vine", tough to do with over 325 officials. The disgruntled female officials believed that they were being treated unfairly, but had no proof.

They claimed that we were keeping the numbers a secret. It really wasn't a secret. We weren't publicizing the numbers on our website, one just had to ask. The numbers are now on our website.

Right, or wrong, for almost forty years, maybe longer, we've had a "culture" of keeping one's schedule "close to the vest". When someone inquires about one's schedule, the "tradition" was to be vague regarding the number and level of games, probably to prevent jealousies and complaints.

As a rookie official, I remember being asked by another subvarsity official about my schedule and answered something like, "I got twenty junior varsity games". A veteran varsity official, one of our top guys, heard that and later told me never to answer with such specificity.

Even though our numbers, once reviewed, looked pretty fair, with no intent of bias, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission "hung onto this bone like an angry dog", asking for document after document, for over two years. Our insurance company now wants to negotiate a settlement.

For the record, the state does not run the camps. There is one camp they run at their annual conference, but there are no camps outside of those that are run directly by the IHSA. Associations, assignors or conferences run camps because at least in basketball, it is customary for them to use this to evaluate officials for their conferences for assigning. And many associations want to give their officials a chance to train officials. It also must be noted that it is hard to run a camp if you have no tournament, league or level willing to give us that chance to use their games as a training environment.

Peace

Local Camps ...
 

Good point. That's why we had to stop running our local evaluation and training camp. We now have only one weekend day camp for the entire state, only for inexperienced officials. If one wants anything else, one has to pay the big bucks to attend an overnight camp in another state (though our local board does offer some scholarship money).

Are the HS officials in your association independent contractors or employees of the association executive board?

If they are truly independent contractors, then no one is obligated to assign them to anything. They don't even have to receive one assignment the whole season. The independent contractor agreement in NV specifically states that you are not guaranteed any assignments.

Range Of Games ...
 

At the time, our assignment commissioner (a paid employee of our local board) was bound by our rules to assign each "good standing" (dues paid, fees paid, certain important meetings attended) official a "range of games" (number of assignments) dependent on one's ranking, which, in turn, was based on one's rating, which was based on peer ratings, written exam, meetings attended, and availability. The rankings were also used to determine varsity, or subvarsity, status.

The disgruntled female officials were not really concerned about their number of assignments, but rather, on their status as varsity, or subvarsity, officials. A few believed that their status should be based on years of experience, as well as their ability. Years of experience was not part of the status equation. Never was, in terms of guaranteed varsity assignments. We never had rule that said "ten years in means guaranteed varsity assignments" (we did have a rule that stipulated a minimum number of years to get some varsity games, or a full varsity schedule, that rule no longer exists). This very small group thought that they were "spinning their wheels" working subvarsity games and never getting a varsity game. They believed that it was their gender holding them back, not their lack of ability. But this was happening to low ability guys as well as low ability gals. Due to the lack of a well publicized "master list", they couldn't know whether there was gender discrimination, or not.

Since then, we have changed our system to a system based on observations by trained observers, with no posted "range of games" (number of assignments), but on the discretion of the assignment commissioner based on the observations. Trained observers also decide varsity, or subvarsity, status. We also have a "master list" on our website. We can now see who gets varsity games, and who gets subvarsity games (but not the number of assignments).

The independent contractor tag has been loosely tossed around our local board for several decades. I'm not sure that it's used in a truly legal sense.

That's what I thought.

And discrimination laws (Title VII) don't apply to ICs (at least at the federal level), so assigners can use pretty much whatever criteria they want in making assignments.

Fwiw
 

In recent years, there have been several court decisions holding officials to be employees, not independent contractors, of the state's scholastic athletic association. I think two of them arose here in eastern Pennsylvania. And, too, a regional NLRB decision to certify a union for officials, as employees.

Wouldn't that all depend on the nature of how the games are given or how officials are paid? If you are paid through an association directly, I know that can lead to some violating employee rules if you pay them a certain amount of money and you are not taking out taxes and social security in your payment. I know several associations I belong to took out certain langauge in their Constitutions to avoid the appearance of having any assigning directly for the membership.

Also, there was an organization (that assigned another sport) that was hit with a hefty tax bill when they were paying officials directly and were not giving the proper tax information or reporting that they were paying officials directly.

I am certainly not saying this is not happening, but I wonder if the issues in those cases are related to other issues like I mentioned. I know many employee laws are state laws that some jurisdictions have to follow. Federal law is a different issue, but usually, they are related to taxes and paying social security properly from my understanding.

Peace

If I recall correctly, the two PA cases involved gender discrimination, and officials were paid directly by schools, not through their association or assigner. But the assigners controlled who got which games and who worked varsity, and district officials determined who got state play-offs.

Sounds like a lot going on there. I am sure many of these issues would be clarified with either a lawsuit or some kind of work strike. But that would take everyone in an area working together for the greater good. Unfortunately, that has not happened yet.

Peace

How would Independent Contractor vs Employee status affect how many officials work varsity games? AFAIK, officials who want to work 3-person varsity can join 3-person associations and conferences if they are IC's, but they have to accept whatever PIAA (or another state governing body) or the association tells them if they are employees? If they are employees, PIAA, the association, etc. would have to pay them benefits and withhold income in taxes, and follow anti-discrimination statues, so I don't know if associations are willing to do that, even if they want to exert the control over officials that employers currently have over their employees.

Civil Rights ...
 

I find this topic to be quite interesting, but I'm not a labor attorney, nor do I play one on television, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express recently.

Let's see if I've got this straight.

It is possible for basketball officials to be legally discriminated against in regard to level and number of assignments, said discrimination based solely on race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, color, age, political affiliation, ethnicity, religion, etc., because while one person (assigner), or assigning organization (board, association, conference, state association), assigns the games, another writes the payment checks (schools, school systems, municipalities, the state, conferences, the state association, etc.).

So, using me for an example, our local assignment commissioner, hired on a one year contract by my local board, supervised by our local board's executive committee, who assigns 100% of all regular season high school games and all post season conference/league playoff high school games, in our local geographic area, as well as many middle school games, can legally discriminate against me because I'm white, male, heterosexual, sixty-four years old, a Democrat, Irish-American, or Catholic, and legally get away with it because all my payment checks come from schools, school systems, municipalities, or the state, who don't assign any games. Also I never, ever get any form of payment from my local board.

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.-...=0&w=346&h=181

Even if my specifics are off, am I, at least, on the right track?

So, the government, (in those unmarked black helicopters), and all their civil rights laws, and all their tax payer funded attorneys in their fancy suits, in all their oak furnished courtrooms, with their black robed judges, can't legally stop such discrimination.

Somehow, that just doesn't seem right in the land of liberty and justice for all.

I guess that sometimes you just can't legislate against all forms of civil rights discrimination, and individuals have the legal right to act in such a way, the price we pay for living in a land of freedom.

Sometimes we're free to do what some, but not all, consider stupid, immoral, or wrong.

Now, if the Forum wants to discriminate against Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. because he's older than dirt, I can certainly go along with that.

Change The Course Of Mighty Rivers, Bend Steel In His Bare Hands ...
 

Let's get this guy to fight for civil rights. After all it's his job to fight a never ending battle for truth, justice, and the American way.

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.x...=0&w=244&h=166

The issue arises if an officials association hires or maintains authority over an assigner and gets a chunk of money to covered scheduled games from school districts or the state from which it issues checks to officials.

That could be found to be an employer/employee relationship. Work through the IRS definition of independent contractor and the analysis shows the categorization fails.

The right to decline work is the only potential way out for the association, but even that can be defeated by a showing that the association took action that could be deemed retribution, real or implied, against a contractor who says no too often, especially if the normal custom and practice for using ratings to determine assignments is ignored to make a point..

If the check ain't coming from the school, state or league, and the officials association writes the checks, then there needs to be legal separation between officials association and assigner, otherwise the association risks being an employer, albeit one that is engaged in employee leasing. And by writes the checks, i include using a third-party vendor, such as RefPay, to handle it.

It goes to more than discrimination actions. In some jurisdictions, it may raise a game injury to an injury arising out of and in the course of employment, which means workers comp.

Also, don't try to tell me some assigners are not reluctant to assign women to boys varsity high school games. "It's happening and it's about damn time they were called on it," said the 60ish, Irish-American, Catholic, Democrat member of the AFL_CIO

Right To Decline Work ...
 

Here in my little corner of Connecticut, if we turn back a game on a date that we have not blocked off on Arbiter, we are fined $15.00. Failing to pay this fine means that one will not receive any game assignments for the following season.

Can that be deemed to be retribution?