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

There's a new twist on our local board this coming season. We can request from our assignment commissioner that we only get assigned boys games, only girls games, or both. No promises, he'll do the best he can to accommodate our requests.

In the past, we've had a few guys, older, with some orthopedic problems, "unofficially" request, and be granted, only girls games (does that mean girls get officials skewed toward the older, and slower (and maybe fatter, and out of shape) end of the spectrum).

I'm wondering if this is an off shoot from our big change last year. Previous to last year, if our guys made both the boys and girls state tournament list (coaches vote), they could work both genders. Last year, if they made both lists, they had to chose only one gender, allowing some of our up and coming guys to work the tournament, those guys who, in previous years, would be sitting out the tournament (probably added about a dozen local guys to work state tournament games). Of course, this also meant that some of our "best" officials wouldn't work the gender they they didn't select. This was a highly contentious issue that made for some interesting, and very long meetings. The "new way" was the way that all the other five local Connecticut IAABO boards had been working state tournament games, we had been an outlier for many, many years.

I guess that this means that we'll get some guys who want to be regular season "specialists", boys specialists, or girl specialists, hoping to get enough one gender coach votes to make the tournament list. The more girls games you work, the more votes your likely to get, and the same for boys.

Maybe some female officials will want to only work girls games, providing role models for girls that may want to try officiating as adults (my daughter played basketball for about six years at a very high level and only saw one female official in all of those games).

Not personally, but in general, for the good of the cause, I have mixed feelings about choosing boys or girls for the regular season, and about being forced to chose boys or girls for the for the state tournament.

It's always nice to get choices. It may be nice to get some new blood in the state tournament.

But is there any chance that the girls will end up getting short changed (not getting the best officials) for the regular season, and/or the state tournament?

In have two daughters who played sports in high school, one of those in college, I'm a modern Title IX feminist type of guy, and something about this, I can't quite put my finger on it, bothers me?

I'm probably looking at this more from the female student athlete's side, rather than the official's side.

What would Gloria Steinem say?

Should I be allowed to request only games with mostly black players? Or mostly white players? Only at big schools? Only at small schools? Not out in farm country? Only at Catholic schools? Not at Catholic schools? Not at deaf schools?

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?

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?

I find this issue to be quite confusing, I'm fighting with myself, I can't put it all into words (though I certainly tried), and it gives me a headache thinking about it.

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.g...=0&w=300&h=300

I'm thinking yes, that will be a residual effect. But it also might open up opportunities for some younger, up-and-coming officials to work some higher profile games on the girls side.

What would be interesting is if a female official were to request only boys games.

The Plot Thickens ...
 

Good thought.

Thanks for reading my lengthy post. I probably can't disagree with anyone's opinion because I can clearly see both sides of this issue, from the standpoint of a student athlete, and from the standpoint of an official, from the "choice is good" side, and from the "best official" gets the game side.

The plot thickens.

What happens when some principals (many female), athletic directors (many female), and coaches of girls teams (both male, and female) find out that some of our best officials can't be assigned to their girls games because some of the best officials have opted out of working girls regular season games?

What happens when some boys coaches who voted for a great officials (who worked both genders regular season) find out that some great officials aren't working the boys state tournament because these great officials were forced to pick a gender and decided to work girls tournament games (maybe with the hope of advancing to higher rounds)?

I can prove that the girls games get worse officiating in my area. The association gives all officials a rating. Let's say those numbers are 1-5 with 1 being the best.
It is a simple process to compare the quality of officiating on the games. Take the ratings of the officials and sum them. The lower the total, the better that the crew rates. If after doing the math, the boys crews average 5.2 and girls crews average 6.3, we have quantitatively demonstrated that worse officials are being provided for the girls contests.

When I saw the title of this thread being posted from by an "associate" of mine from CT where I (because I am from Youngstown, Ohio) have a number of "friends", I thought it was about large officiating bags which can be very useful for other activities. :p

MTD, Sr.

Watch Out For The Black Helicopters ...
 

And your willing to put this in writing? Where all with access to the internet can see it?

What if your school principals see this? What if your school athletic directors see this? What if coaches of your girls teams see this? What if girl players in your area see this? What if the parents of girls players in your area see this? Some of them may be attorneys. What if someone for the American Civil Liberties Union sees this? What if a Title IX coordinator sees this?

And worse, what if Gloria Steinem sees this? Do you really want to deal with a former Playboy bunny?

http://www.fototime.com/C7453E1F98544B8/standard.jpg

I hope that your real name isn't Nevadaref, and that you really don't live in Nevada. Even then, they'll still find you. Right after they find the high level White House official that wrote that anonymous op-ed piece in the New York Times. They'll find him, and they'll find you. Watch out for the black helicopters.

I am so happy I don't have to put up with this nonsense in Illinois. If I had to work girls games, I would never have started officiating high school basketball. It is pretty obvious in the Chicago area that the overall quality of girls officials is significantly lower than the boys officials. Most of the men doing high school girls games in this area are doing them because they were not good enough to get boys games or a full schedule of boys games.

And who cares what the principals, athletic directors, coaches, or Gloria Steinem thinks. As an independent contractor, I get to choose for whom and when I work. If they want better officials, they should make their product better.

Potato Blight ...
 

You mean your friends in East Haven, Connecticut. It has the highest percentage if Italian Americans in the state with the highest percentage of Italian Americans. As a little tyke, I lived there. The only Irish family in town. They made us sit in the back of the church on Sundays. The doctor always checked me for potato blight, "just in case".

I always thought that you were a "friend" of Whitey Bulger and moved from MA to CT to look after his "business" interests, :p.

MTD, Sr.

Good For The Game ...
 

That's the point of view I wanted to hear. And I get it I get it 100%. I can also see the other side, but I still get it. Why should I work games I really don't want to work. Maybe I'll put less effort in the game if I really don't want to be there. Is that good for the game?

Magically Delicious ...
 

If you live in East Haven, and want a "slice", just stick out your hand and it appears. You never have to go very far.

"Worse officiating" can mean different things. e.g. An official can be completely competent for both genders but simply can't keep up with boys.

Unfortunately no choice here in SC. Work both genders or don't work. Games are assigned as G/B DHs.

Not In Connecticut, No Such Animal ...
 

Certainly makes it nice and simple.

So, let me think, the boys get the "tired" officials? Parents of girls have to rush home from work to see the game, but parents of boys can just leisurely drive home, get a bite, maybe a "slice", and go to the game?

I don't have to put my hand out. People just know to bring me my "slice". But I do miss the good old days when "whacking" some meant something other than giving a HC a TF! LOL!

MTD, Sr.

Sometimes ...
 

Girls coaches complaint: "Crews don't give full effort in our games because they have to work another game after."

Boys coaches complaint: "Crews are tired because they had to work a game right before ours."

Only way we would have separate crews is if schools started playing girls and boys on different nights. Not going to happen.

Monday, Monday (The Mamas And The Papas, 1966) ...
 

Back when I started, almost forty years ago, it was almost universal that boys played Tuesday and Friday nights, and girls played on Mondays and Thursdays (we use to have our board meetings on Wednesday nights).

Nice setup, especially for schools with one gymnasium. No need to close the folding doors and split the gym for practice (except for Wednesdays). Teams were guaranteed a full gym on at least two weekday afternoons, at convenient times right after school.

Plenty of officials to work both genders over four different nights.

Why it changed, I don't know?

Some schools now use a "one gender home, the other gender on the road" schedule, and some apparently schedule with a pair of fuzzy dice.

Now we have our board meetings on Sunday mornings, which pisses off those who want to attend religious services with their families.

Complain To This ...
 

Yeah, I'm A Little Stinker ...
 

Who wants to have more fun?

Cheerleaders.

At all the home games, both genders? Always at boys games (home and on the road)?

For us, most of our top officials are assigned zero (or very few) girls games, and that's just the way it works. No opt-in/opt-out or choosing required.

Boys and girls generally play on different nights, but that doesn't change the fact that some of our top dogs will just get a night off on "girls nights." They don't have to request no girls. Our assignor just does it that way.

Other top officials may get a smattering of girls, says 6-8 games out of 35. I can't think of any "good" officials in our area who do even 40 percent girls games.

So in our area, girls definitely get lower-quality officials -- and fewer three-person crews -- and that's just life.

Pretty much how it works here. I only get asked to work a girls game as a "favor" to the assignor that might assign both. And the rest never even attempt to ask because they already know the answer. I also work college which takes up many of my off high school nights. It is really obvious when the state finals come and the lower classes clearly do not get the same quality of officials as the boys do as a general rule. ;)

Yes, yes and yes. This is not social justice we are talking about here. I have no desire to work girls basketball and only did it early on because it would get me experience. Now I have choices and I make no apologies for my choices. When I leave my house I have to be satisfied with what I am doing or I will stay home.

Peace

We don't choose or get opted into girls or boys. We let our assignor know what nights we are available and then games get assigned to us on that night. Our zone is pretty rural so everyone has to drive everywhere but other than a couple of outliers that require special scheduling all the little schools are in about a 90 minute radius. I could get a varsity and jv boys double header, a boys and girls doubel header, all girls, depends on what the school has on the docket. I had a night last year where I worked with a new official on middle school girls game, before a different partner showed up to work a varsity boys game with me.

Properly rated officials can be given playoff assignments. In our sectional playoffs officials cannot come from the local assigning zone, so we can be sent as pairs or individuals off to sectionals. There is an assigned chief for all weekend who makes the pairings for officials the 2nd day. Officials who officiate the sectional finals are short listed to provincial (state) finals. Overseeing board picks and pairs all officials from that list for finals.

There is no distinction made between girls/boys games in terms of who asks/gets/assigned to what.

It should also be noted that in my state it's much more economical for the schools to pay officials for a DH than single games.

A single regular-season varsity game is $55 plus mileage ($0.45/mile both ways, minimum $9). A varsity DH is $78 plus mileage (at the same rate). i.e. When we work two games we aren't paid for two separate games ("you're already there").

The schools want to go to flat fees to help with budgeting so eventually that will probably happen, but I doubt that will result in any change to the way games are scheduled.

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.

I didn't read all of your original post, I skimmed through and portions caught my attention. ;)

Also, you added quite a bit to your post after I had already responded.

I assign varsity games only for 24 schools. I can hire whoever I want.

There are a few officials where I will honor a boys-only request. I know these officials, many of them work college for an assigner who will not allow them to work any girls/women hoops. They're good people, they ask in the right way, and they appreciate what they do get from me.

There are a few officials who have asked for boys only because they see the first group getting boys only -- and I told them if they don't work girls, they aren't getting anything. They haven't earned that from me or other assigners here (one crew I remember had about 4 years experience). No skin off my whatever.

I've always worked both. The one year I decided to only work boys games, I got assigned to work the state tournament for girls. At that point I simply started working girls games again. The conversations with assigners here were awkward, too.

How do I feel about the whole "girls officials are worse" thing?

Regarding ratings -- if you put the same people from boys games onto girls games, their ratings would be worse. That's my experience -- my boys ratings are considerably higher than my girls ratings EVERY YEAR. I won't call every little bump a foul and many of those coaches expect that.

Furthermore, I find it much easier to work a boys game. Much easier to get into a rhythm, much easier to make a call/no-call decision on contact, etc.

Finally, as someone who has now assigned for 5 years -- those who think they're great officials aren't always so in the eyes of the schools and coaches. And I've weeded out people who really don't want to be at my smaller schools, too.

"Independent contractors" :rolleyes:

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

We have plenty like that here, and many of them go far in the postseason. But the schools can scratch a generous number of officials (I think 8?) so that kind of solves the issue of schools/coaches not liking certain officials.

Thankfully small college assigners in this region don't make those demands. Would be asinine given that high school games in GA, SC, and NC are all assigned as G/B DHs.

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

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

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.

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

Hyperbole ...
 

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.

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.

Independent Contractor ...
 

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.

http://bit-player.org/wp-content/upl...e-cimg0177.jpg

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?

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

Are We Fooling Ourselves ???
 

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?

Black Helicopters ...
 

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.

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.

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

No Questions Asked ...
 

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.

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.f...=0&w=300&h=300

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

Master of Puppets (Metallica, 1986) …
 

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).

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.p...=0&w=226&h=174

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.

In VA we have some organizations who only service private school games. My point being, you're comparing apples to meatloaf since there are delineations for private/public schools and boys/girls basketball.

Definitely not independent contractor status; sounds more like a Communist system.

Apples To Meatloaf ...
 

I got your excellent point before you made it the first time. My questions were rhetorical in nature, asked to be thought provoking for the purpose of the topic, and I appreciated the value of your response toward a fuller understanding of the issues in this thread.

"Comparing apples to meatloaf"? I wasn't familiar with that idiom, but it was great.

Like Comparing Apples To Meatloaf © 2018 Raymond

And now it's yours to keep. You're welcome. Hope it earns you big bucks.

Vote Early, Vote Often ...
 

Communist? No. Socialist? Maybe. We still vote for our local board leaders. Sometimes there's more than one person on the ballot. Connecticut, after all, is a very blue state. It's in our blood.

It's actually more like building hotels on both Boardwalk, and Park Place, and owning the Pennsylvania, B&O, Reading, and Short Line railroads. Everybody else still has a chance, but do they really?

There's Nothing Holdin' Me Back (Shawn Mendes, 2017) ...
 

But I can work as many recreation games as I want, anywhere in Connecticut.

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.l...=0&w=300&h=300

Come on Billy. With the exception of one, I feel that every question you asked in your OP was rhetorical. You know that there is no perfect method to all this officiating stuff. You included a lot of "should"s in there and you know the answers. Luvs!

Rhetorical ...
 

Busted.