Totally agree. I get why this happens or people think this is the a good thing on the surface, but when it is about the person that assigns in your group and that relationship with the group is strained, then this is what can and will happen.

Peace

Bad Zebra, Thanks, good advice. Same with everyone who replied. His stated goal is to destroy our group. He took 5 of the best officials with him. 2 are college level officials.

But we have a very good core. It just bothers me that someone can do this. I would never have thought about it in a million years.

It happened here 8 years ago when a commissioner (assignor) was voted out. Quality of local HS officiating has been for sh!t ever since because of the fracture. It's why I traveled up to Richmond for 6 years to officiate HS games.

This is simply not true much of the time no matter how much people throw the "independent contractor" card around. There are many states that do not allow you to take games from more than one association. There are associations that will treat you poorly for being a dual member even if it's not prohibited. And even at the college level or in states where associations don't assign games, there are assigners who hate each other and will not use guys that work for the other guy, or there are single-gender assigners that won't let their guys work the other gender. Spin it however you want, but that is restriction of trade.

This is all well and good, but at the end of the day this is a competitive, often cutthroat business no matter how much we want it to be a utopia.

I wouldn't work for him based on this alone.

If I am a member of an association and association leadership does this, how does this help me?

Somehow I'm not sure we're getting both sides of the story regarding this association split. Five of the best officials in the association leave along with this person and two of them are college level officials, and we're supposed to believe that all of this happened because someone lost an election?? Seems to me like there's more to this than what we've been told.

Anything Goes (Cole Porter, 1934) ...
 

By keeping school schedules, and thus more game assignments for you, especially if you're not a member of another assigning board.

You're right, it's not a great idea, but in the "dog eat dog world" of two competing assigning boards in the same locality, anything goes when it comes to making one assigning board look more attractive to coaches/athletic directors/principals/league directors than the other assigning board.

And maybe, depending on the state guidelines and contracted fees, it's easier to "tinker" with scrimmage fees than it is to "tinker" with actual game fees.

In the specific case of this thread, the "Brand X" assigning board already came up with a cost saving measure of lower total game fees by agreeing to go with two person crews.

Some schools may find this cost saving idea of "quantity over quality" financially attractive and thus, a real bargain.

Others may not.

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.Z...=0&w=300&h=300 https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.n...=0&w=238&h=179

The Assigner ...
 

Perhaps the position of President has the additional role of an assigner, which can be quite a powerful role.

What's the most common argument, either as an "in your face" argument, or a "behind the scenes" undercurrent argument, in the business aspect of any local association/board?

Three answers, in order: Games assigned. Games assigned. Games assigned.

More games. Better games. More higher level games. Less travel distance games. More boys games. Fewer girls games. Better sites. More varsity games. Fewer subvarsity games. No middle school games. No two person games. More conference playoff games. More games at sites where the concession stand gives the officials free refreshments.

Games assigned. Games assigned. Games assigned.

Who controls all that?

The Great and Powerful Assigner, and there's nobody hiding behind the curtain.

We are a board of about 50 officials, the majority over 50, as I am, he was younger at 41. 10 years experience, The others that left were all around the same age and younger, they were not happy with their progress in the association, Personally I don't blame them but if they had been patient their time would have come.

I don't know how this is going turn out yet, but I do know that having to associations in a small area is not good. Not good for wages not good for assignments.

One of the people who left and is a college official, Ran for interpreter and lost to. Another ran for secretary and lost. So there's a lot of ego involved here.

Perhaps they feel that your association is too much of a "good ol' boys" network for them to reach their goals. After all, you say you don't blame them for not being happy and that they're relatively young–common complaints of disgruntled officials. And the reality is, "their time will come" simply isn't true all the time.

It is true that many officials that complain about politics have an overinflated opinion about their abilities. It is equally true that many officials cannot advance for no reason other than the good ol' boys system, and acting like that's not true is just disingenuous.

I am not saying I support them forming a new association; simply trying to interpret their frustration. And again, paying lip service about "sticking together" and officiating being a "brotherhood" is great except at the end of the day, this is a business.

Like SC said, it sounds like you might have ran them off as much as them leaving. If they were good, even better, why would you think it is fair to make them wait their turn?

A college official being held back cause of older officials blocking their progress.

Time shoukd mean nothing in getting good assignments. If the officials are good enough but not getting games because they're being blocked by older people I don't blame them from moving on.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Competition is the American way.
Numerous successful companies began because an employee became disgruntled with the current leadership and decided that it was better to depart, start his own business, and do it better.

There is nothing wrong with what is taking place in your area. Competition will sort it out.

As far as elections go, I've found that true democratic votes don't usually serve the best interests of an officiating association.

For example, if the group has 30% varsity officials and 70% subvarsity officials, understand that your group will be governed by the 70% who do not work varsity contests. If you elect an assignor, the subvarsity guys will dictate who that assignor will be. Will that be best for the varsity officials?

Another situation would be if an association has 20 truly top officials and another 20 who are second tier, an elected assignor will be obligated to keep as many of those happy as possible in order to get re-elected. This can lead to some lesser officials getting games that they shouldn't.

Situations like the above lead to frustration by some officials and can spur people to break away and form their own officiating group.