Papa's Got A Brand New Bag (James Brown, 1965) ...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

"Independent contractors"

If they set the terms of the contract they are giving you, you still have the choice to decide that you do not want to work. That is your prerogative to do that either way.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

Exactly. And these are D3 assigners, too, who think way too highly of themselves.

Is that any different than high school assignors that tell people what they have to do in order to work their conferences? Any small college has its own world associated with it. They have a right to make some requirements when people that work multiple levels likely work their leagues. Also, many college leagues have an association with some other levels. I know many D3 women's leagues in the midwest are run by assignors that assign D1 directly. So when you attend her camp, she considers you for her D3 league as well as her D2 league and major college assignments. I work for a couple of people that are D1 assignors that brings the Big Ten Supervisor to their camps or trainings. I have a couple of people I know that just got hired in the Big Ten consortium and they had been working D3, D2, NAIA for years as well as going to the Big Ten camps. I would not quite say they think that highly of themselves, they use it as an evaluation zone for their bigger assignments.

Peace

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If they set the terms of the contract they are giving you, you still have the choice to decide that you do not want to work. That is your prerogative to do that either way.

Peace

Never seen a contract for a college assigner that says "you may not work high school girls games."

Sure you can choose not to work for a certain assigner. I can quit my real job whenever I want for whatever reason without repercussion. Difference is my employer has a legal right to tell me who I can and cannot provide my services to.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Never seen a contract for a college assigner that says "you may not work high school girls games."

Sure you can choose not to work for a certain assigner. I can quit my real job whenever I want for whatever reason without repercussion. Difference is my employer has a legal right to tell me who I can and cannot provide my services to.

I so enjoy the twisting and turning of people who try to defend the "independent contractor" thing as if it's clear....or really independent.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Never seen a contract for a college assigner that says "you may not work high school girls games."

Sure you can choose not to work for a certain assigner. I can quit my real job whenever I want for whatever reason without repercussion. Difference is my employer has a legal right to tell me who I can and cannot provide my services to.

There are a lot of requirements we have that are not clearly stated. Just like at a job interview you are not asked to show up many times in a suit and tie, but if you don't then it might influence you being hired. I get what you are saying, but that kind of misses the point. Even if they did not say that to officials, there is a big drop off from a D3 game that might be very physical to a girls game were you might not get anyone in the game that can dribble. So it often does not have to be said, but for my game it is better I stick with Men's and Boy's games. I have said this before, there is a different attitude about what you call in a girls game than a boys game. That is clear if you have done both. Many college assignors who have a much smaller staff can make some demands because they can find people willing to do what is asked of them if you choose to not fill that role.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Does your state have black basketball and non-black basketball? Farm basketball and non-farm basketball? My state has girls basketball and boys basketball. My state has private school basketball and public school basketball. I can choose to travel long distances (farm country) or not.

My questions were rhetorical in nature, asked to be thought provoking for the purpose of the topic. I considered your response as I posed the questions, before you replied, and then appreciated the value of your response toward a fuller understanding of the issues in this thread.

We can't opt out of private school games nor can we opt out of long trips, of course we only cover two counties in Connecticut and my longest trip is 55 miles to a school that may have more John Deere tractors than cars in the school parking lot.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There are a lot of requirements we have that are not clearly stated. Just like at a job interview you are not asked to show up many times in a suit and tie, but if you don't then it might influence you being hired. I get what you are saying, but that kind of misses the point. Even if they did not say that to officials, there is a big drop off from a D3 game that might be very physical to a girls game were you might not get anyone in the game that can dribble. So it often does not have to be said, but for my game it is better I stick with Men's and Boy's games. I have said this before, there is a different attitude about what you call in a girls game than a boys game. That is clear if you have done both. Many college assignors who have a much smaller staff can make some demands because they can find people willing to do what is asked of them if you choose to not fill that role.

Peace

Just because college assigners have the flexibility to tell their officials what games they may not work doesn't make it right, or legal. Telling "independent contractors" who they can and cannot provide their services to and then saying "If you don't like it, I don't need you" is completely the opposite of what an independent contractor is supposed to be. I'm not expecting it to change, just calling out the hypocrisy.

The IRS would have a field day with assigners that impose requirements like Rich mentioned, if an official really wanted to make a big deal about it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

I so enjoy the twisting and turning of people who try to defend the "independent contractor" thing as if it's clear....or really independent.

Does the official pay the FICA payroll tax of 12.4% of his officiating income, after expenses, when filing his income tax return? (One test for being an independent contractor.)

I just visited a few websites (Turbo Tax, Legal Zoom, IRS) and discovered that whether one is an employee, self-employed, or an independent contractor, is a very complex question, one reputable website stating that qualifications are "not set in stone".

I let my accountants, Dewey, Cheatem & Howe, figure out all this paperwork for me.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Just because college assigners have the flexibility to tell their officials what games they may not work doesn't make it right, or legal. Telling "independent contractors" who they can and cannot provide their services to and then saying "If you don't like it, I don't need you" is completely the opposite of what an independent contractor is supposed to be. I'm not expecting it to change, just calling out the hypocrisy.

I do not think the issue is right or wrong, it is whether this is the reality or not. Just like your state tells officials they must work both girls and boys basketball. Is that right? I am sure that alone makes officials make other decisions about what they work. But if you are going to work playoffs or many high school games I assume that is required and not many choices can be made right in that system?

Originally Posted by SC Official

The IRS would have a field day with assigners that impose requirements like Rich mentioned, if an official really wanted to make a big deal about it.

But many independent contractor laws are state laws, not IRS regulations, at least in some details. I mentioned before that an association got in trouble for paying directly officials and they did not follow the state filing laws. I am not under the impression the IRS even got involved in this situation. Remember we file state and Federal taxes.

My point is at the end of the day, we ultimately decide what we do. We can accept the terms that are given or reject them. Many on a much smaller case we can decide if we want to accept a contract for one level or another based on many factors (travel, partners, timing).

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Just because college assigners have the flexibility to tell their officials what games they may not work doesn't make it right, or legal. Telling "independent contractors" who they can and cannot provide their services to and then saying "If you don't like it, I don't need you" is completely the opposite of what an independent contractor is supposed to be. I'm not expecting it to change, just calling out the hypocrisy. The IRS would have a field day with assigners that impose requirements like Rich mentioned, if an official really wanted to make a big deal about it.

I first became aware of basketball officials calling ourselves "independent contractors" when I first joined the Forum. I believe that my accountant classifies my officiating income as "self-employed", but I really don't pay to much attention to stuff like this, that's why I pay him to do my taxes.

In regard to our legal rights, and the legality of what assigners often do, and in regard to taxes, should we stop calling ourselves independent contractors, or are we fooling ourselves?

Many of us are not accountants, or lawyers, in our day jobs, are we "out of our league" discussing this? Are there any accountants, or lawyers, on the Forum who can set us on the "straight and narrow", especially in regard to federal standards?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But many independent contractor laws are state laws, not IRS regulations ...

I was just on the IRS website and they make a "big deal" of this, especially if one doesn't pay one's FICA payroll tax. As you stated, state laws may vary from federal laws, but one must adhere to both laws (adding to the complexity of this issue), plus I'm sure that the IRS works in conjunction with states in regard to audits, etc.

Our assigner reminds us every year that his records of games assigned, fees, etc., will be open to IRS inspection if asked. Every year, more and more Connecticut schools are using Arbiter Pay, and Arbiter Pay has also made it clear that their records are open to IRS inspection.

The IRS has a real problem with one calling themselves something (employee, self-employed, independent contractor) when they aren't, and with employers calling those who work for them something that they're not.

The IRS had no problems putting Al Capone in prison. Hopefully we're just "small potatoes", not worth their time, energy, resources, etc.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Don't all of these kids deserve the best officials available at that date and time?

Should mostly white officials be assigned to mostly white games? Should mostly black officials be assigned to mostly black games? Should mostly Catholic officials be assigned to Catholic school games? Should mostly female officials be assigned to girls games?

Officials already make those decisions and I am sure they make those decisions within your area as well as other areas.

In the Chicago area, there are officials that refuse to work games in certain areas. And yes those areas involve a certain demographic or certain cultures they would not see in others.

I lived in a western suburb for over 15 years (after moving from central Illinois). The western suburbs are mostly middle to upper middle class and not very diverse in many areas (some are but work with me). I knew officials in those areas that would never go to Chicago, for example, to work in the city that has a lot of predominately Black and Hispanic areas. I knew officials from the city that did not want to go to a lot of suburbs because they did not like the style of play in those other areas. And many officials simply liked to work where they lived and did not like the travel. All those personal standards had consequences good and bad.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Again, don't all of these kids deserve the best officials available at that date and time, regardless of the gender of the players, or the officials?

Officials have the right to decide what they are going to do unless you are going to pay them enough to make that decision harder. There are only 7 days a week and I am sure between work and family if I am available 4 of those days, I will decide on some level if I am going to work anything. Because the alternative is that they might not be available at all. I guess we have to make some real choices as to what we require. I know officials that simply want to stay rather close to home and there are assignors here that will make that happen because they have enough schools and games to allow that to take place. Many officials never pursue working for certain assignors simply because of the location of their schools.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Officials already make those decisions and I am sure they make those decisions within your area as well as other areas.

Your post describes the benefit of something that I naively asked a few weeks ago, why work for more than one assigner.

We don't have that benefit here in my little corner or Connecticut. If one wants to work high school games there is only one assigner, and you work under his, and the board's, rules (one in the same).

The last "independent", non-IAABO board in Connecticut merged (actually a hostile takeover) with my local IAABO board about fifteen years ago. Connecticut high schools are now 100% covered by IAABO, with it's rules, and local territorial boundaries.

Up until this new choice (boys, girls, both) our blocks were quite limited. You could block out days, and times, of course. You could also block out schools, or teams of that school, for "conflict of interest" reasons (when I taught in our local school system, and coached middle school basketball, I blocked out the local high school). Up until this recent "gender choice" change there were no other blocks "officially" available to us. Certainly not for distance, school size, quality of play, etc.

If an official is having a particular problem with a certain coach, or a certain partner, one could discuss this with the assigner and work it out "unofficially".

Other than what I mentioned above, we really don't have any other choices.

That's why I was puzzled at this recent (gender choice) change. Up until now (with very few exceptions), we pretty much worked the games that the assigner wanted us to work, no questions asked.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Your post describes the benefit of something that I naively asked a few weeks ago, why work for more than one assigner.

We don't have that benefit here in my little corner or Connecticut. If one wants to work high school games there is only one assigner, and you work under his, and the board's, rules (one in the same).

We do not have the luxury to only work for one person at all times in this area. Maybe if you are a lower level assignor you can get away with that on some level, but a varsity official cannot. No assignor I know is going to give you 40 varsity games just in their conference with at most 12 to 16 schools. You are only likely got get anywhere from 3 to 5 in many situations realistically. So you have to work for someone else unless you want to work a very minimal varsity schedule. Also for playoff consideration and not always stated explicitly, the more places you work the more you could be used or sent to different locations and that means more opportunities there as well. I know the state assigns people that have experience and are known by multiple leagues so when you work the playoffs, it is not as much of a total surprise you showed up in that location.

Here is the other part of this. We have the largest consortium for Arbiter in the country called the "Chicago High School Basketball Association" or CHSBA That has several assignors and several conferences at both high school and college level being assigned through this Arbiter site. An official is not going to get hired by just anyone on the CHSBA just because they are registered on that site. I would have had to likely either go to the camp of a particular assignor or have a conversation where I show a desire to work games for them. So it takes some work or networking to get assigned by a particular person. If I never suggest I am interested in working for a particular location, it is unlikely I will even be asked to work games. I work for a person that assigns a large high school conference and an NAIA and JUCO league. He would not assign anyone to his college league or high school league if you did not go to his camps. It is just not going to happen on its own. So if he has a requirement to work his conference like who else you work for and when then I would have a decision to make. I work for college assignors that make it clear they want your Saturdays made available to them more so than any other day of the week. So anytime I get a high school game on a Saturday, I will give those games back for the most part if I am offered a college game. There are high school assignors that do not like you to give back games, but it is a chance I have to take and I do not in advance take any high school games on a Saturday to avoid this potential conflict.

At the end of the day, these are my decisions. I could say, "I will take whatever is given" and that could result in some consequences for those opportunities.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

If one wants to work high school games there is only one assigner, and you work under his, and the board's, rules (one in the same). Connecticut high schools are now 100% covered by IAABO, with it's rules, and local territorial boundaries.

Members of my local board were recently reminded that we must "live in" one of the two counties that our local territory covers, or you can't belong to our local board (veterans were grandfathered in, we used to have "dual membership" status, no more).

That presents another lack of choice. No longer can we officiate where we work, went to school, etc., if we don't live and work, went to school, etc., in the same local territory (two Connecticut counties).



Does it sound like I'm an independent contractor, or am I self employed?

Or course, I can take my skills elsewhere. I do have choices to work recreation, travel, AAU, some middle schools, out of state, college, professional, Olympics, etc., that are outside the "IAABO Universe" (Note to self: Write superhero screenplay entitled "IAABO Universe").

Note: I like my local board, and I've been treated fairly by my local IAABO board, even under the strict restrictions that we work under. I'm a journeyman official and I get a full schedule of games, boys and girls, even some high level games. I even get a few votes every year for the state tournament, boys and girls, just not enough. A few (two, or three) long trips each season (less than an hour away), but most of my games are within a thirty-minute drive. I've taken advantage of the massive number of outstanding educational opportunities offered to me. I've been treated fairly by our rating systems. I've worked under four different assigners over thirty-eight years (two short term, two long term) and have been treated extremely well by all of them. Meetings are mostly educational in nature, with little "business". Yeah, it's a monopoly, but it's a monopoly that's treated me well. I really can't complain.