The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 28, 2019, 06:32pm
LRZ LRZ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SE PA
Posts: 588
Res Judicata

The appellate court ruled that we are not employees, but independent contractors, thus PIAA won the case. PIAA then justified rescinding our insurance because, in part, it could be seen as proof we are employees--an issue PIAA had already prevailed on (and therefore can't be relitigated).

Last edited by LRZ; Sun Jul 28, 2019 at 06:50pm.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 28, 2019, 06:34pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRZ View Post
The appellate court ruled that we are not employees, but independent contractors, thus PIAA won the case. PIAA then justified rescinding our insurance because, in part, it could be seen as proof we are employees--an issue PIAA had already prevailed on.


This action is just a big middle finger from the PIAA.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 28, 2019, 06:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRZ View Post
The appellate court ruled that we are not employees, but independent contractors, thus PIAA won the case. PIAA then justified rescinding our insurance because, in part, it could be seen as proof we are employees--an issue PIAA had already prevailed on.
Winning that case doesn't mean there can't be more. In today's sue-happy climate, it is sure to resurface.

They just want to avoid giving people a reason to try to stick to them again. It cost them enough. Do people thing their costs from the whole ordeal were going to just get covered with monopoly money?

I can't blame them for reducing their exposure to risk.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 28, 2019, 07:05pm
LRZ LRZ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SE PA
Posts: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Winning that case doesn't mean there can't be more. In today's sue-happy climate, it is sure to resurface.

They just want to avoid giving people a reason to try to stick to them again. It cost them enough. Do people thing their costs from the whole ordeal were going to just get covered with monopoly money?

I can't blame them for reducing their exposure to risk.
Nope, can't be raised again, at least not in PA. The caption of the case is PIAA v. NLRB, denominating the parties. The ruling of the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit* is binding on the NLRB. If another group of PA officials were to claim employee status and try to unionize, the claim would go to and through the NLRB, which would be bound by precedent.

PIAA is passing on the cost of litigation to all registered officials, not just those who sought to unionize, and, as far as I know, not to its member schools.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 28, 2019, 07:07pm
LRZ LRZ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SE PA
Posts: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
This action is just a big middle finger from the PIAA.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Yep. Teaching us not to mess with the powers that be.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 28, 2019, 09:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRZ View Post
Nope, can't be raised again, at least not in PA. The caption of the case is PIAA v. NLRB, denominating the parties. The ruling of the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit* is binding on the NLRB. If another group of PA officials were to claim employee status and try to unionize, the claim would go to and through the NLRB, which would be bound by precedent.
Only until some other condition of the arrangement is changed. In that case, the ruling may no longer hold. Some lawyer, looking to pad his/her income, would be sure to at least make that argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRZ View Post
PIAA is passing on the cost of litigation to all registered officials, not just those who sought to unionize, and, as far as I know, not to its member schools.
Who else can they pass it on to? There isn't some magic money source. When people sue the government looking for a payday, all the citizens pay, not some nebulous body with a money printing machine.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 28, 2019, 09:46pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Only until some other condition of the arrangement is changed. In that case, the ruling may no longer hold. Some lawyer, looking to pad his/her income, would be sure to at least make that argument.


Who else can they pass it on to? There isn't some magic money source. When people sue the government looking for a payday, all the citizens pay, not some nebulous body with a money printing machine.
Their membership. The member schools should be paying the cost of defending litigation or their insurance company.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 29, 2019, 01:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Their membership. The member schools should be paying the cost of defending litigation or their insurance company.
If you were arguing that the schools should be paying more in general, I'd agree with you, but the schools didn't cause this expense. The PIAA membership also includes officials and that is the group that caused them to incur the expense, even if it wasn't all of them. Why should the schools have an extra bill because some officials wanted to take them for something? And even if they did pay for it, why should I (as a tax paying citizen) have to pay for it?
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com

Last edited by Camron Rust; Mon Jul 29, 2019 at 01:24am.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 29, 2019, 02:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
Their membership. The member schools should be paying the cost of defending litigation or their insurance company.
I agree with Rich. Charging the officials to cover a debt incurred by the PIAA while litigating a case against some officials in PA has to be unethical, if not outright illegal. I would argue that it is a punitive action being taken by the PIAA. If I were an official in PA, would refuse to pay that part of the dues. My next step would be to contact my local rep to the state legislature in an attempt to get the state legislative body to pass a resolution stating that the PIAA cannot pass along the costs incurred from the recent litigation of this case to the officials. If that isnít successful, I would then sue in court on the grounds that the PIAA is a punitive manner. There to be precedent out there to prevent one side from taking such action against its adversary in prior litigation.
Imagine if a government contractor sued the government, then after the case was over the government took steps either to ban that contractor from future government work or impose fees upon that business whenever it applied for contracts or services future contracts. That would have to be seen as improper.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 29, 2019, 02:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
If you were arguing that the schools should be paying more in general, I'd agree with you, but the schools didn't cause this expense. The PIAA membership also includes officials and that is the group that caused them to incur the expense, even if it wasn't all of them. Why should the schools have an extra bill because some officials wanted to take them for something? And even if they did pay for it, why should I (as a tax paying citizen) have to pay for it?
How is the PIAA funded? If it receives state funds, then you as a taxpayer already are footing the bill.
In my state, the NIAA is a state agency codified by legislative statutes, but receives no state funding. (Well, not directly.) Its budget comes from corporate sponsorships, private donations, ticket sales at events, and membership dues of the schools and the officials. It can certainly be contended that the money coming from the dues of the member schools which are public schools is basically state funding just being passed along.

For the record, I’ve never understood why the officials ever agreed to paying dues to the state assn. The officials provide a service to the member schools who are collectively represented by the state office. The state assn doesn’t provide anything to the officials. Here the state doesn’t provide any training or education, doesn’t do any assigning, and doesn’t pay the officials. Why the heck are the officials paying this organization? It is basically a forced donation.

Last edited by Nevadaref; Mon Jul 29, 2019 at 02:16am.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 29, 2019, 06:32am
LRZ LRZ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SE PA
Posts: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. View Post
Join NASO.

MTD, Sr.
MTD, does your NASO insurance include medical expenses and such, or just liability against assaults and getting sued and such? It's not clear to me from the website.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 29, 2019, 09:29am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,716
CIAC Officialsí Association ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
For the record, I’ve never understood why the officials ever agreed to paying dues to the state assn. ...
Here in Connecticut, the CIAC Officials Association exists to work in concert with school administrators, athletic directors, coaches, and the CIAC to advance the best interest of high school athletics, serve the betterment of all member officials and their respective organizations, promote ethical standards, sportsmanship, professionalism, and high quality officiating.

The CIAC handles the coordination between the schools schedule software and the officials Arbiter assigning software. It handles 100% (including cost) of all criminal background checks. Officials have a "seat at the table" to discuss issues that are important to us. Basketball officials (actually all sports officials) get a CIAC membership card that gets us into all regular season sports (all sports) at no cost, and into all basketball (only basketball for basketball officials) state tournament games at no cost.

CIAC dues are $13.00 annually, included as part our local boards annual dues. Attend two or three state tournament games, especially the state finals at the Mohegan Sun Casino, and it's a bargain.
__________________
John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Last edited by BillyMac; Mon Jul 29, 2019 at 11:22am.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 29, 2019, 09:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
For the record, Iíve never understood why the officials ever agreed to paying dues to the state assn. The officials provide a service to the member schools who are collectively represented by the state office. The state assn doesnít provide anything to the officials. Here the state doesnít provide any training or education, doesnít do any assigning, and doesnít pay the officials. Why the heck are the officials paying this organization? It is basically a forced donation.
We get our books and insurance from the SCHSL, plus they're now requiring background checks which of coursed was passed onto us.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 29, 2019, 09:45am
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,632
The argument that all PA sports officials should bear the cost of defending the lawsuit when a small group of officials brought the suit is just silly.

Officials are not part of the membership -- they are independent contractors. If the state decides to remove this insurance coverage and doesn't lower the fee, then the officials should do what they feel is necessary, including not working the games unless their fees are lowered and/or their insurance coverage is reinstated. And the PIAA should recover its fees by raising membership dues on its member schools or on advertisers, etc. like any other business.

Schools requiring officials to bring their own coverage would get a quick message -- good luck having your games cause we're not coming.

I agree with the poster above. The "it's for the kids" mentality and officials continuing to bend, bend, bend is why officials are horribly underpaid and why fees stagnate for years on end. And why working conditions are the way they are. State associations just expect officials to take it....and then cry out that there's a horrible shortage. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 29, 2019, 09:57am
LRZ LRZ is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SE PA
Posts: 588
When you pass the PIAA test in a sport, you have to affiliate with a local chapter.

I pay $45 per sport (basketball and soccer) to PIAA, plus another $30 to my two chapters. We pay our own costs for background checks, which are good for five years and then must be renewed. For my yearly outlay of $150, I get a rule book in each sport, plus the basketball case book. That's it. Some chapters also provide the basketball referee manual; chapters usually offer an end-of-season "banquet" to its members.

PIAA is not a state agency, nor does it get federal or state funds. According to its website, it is a non-profit, "voluntary membership" organization and its primary source of revenue, again according to the website, is ticket sales to championship events. Member high schools pay between $475 and $625 yearly, depending on school size, and middle schools pay $265, and these fees constitute ~10% of PIAA's revenue. There are currently 1,431 HSs and 594 MS/JHSs.

Nevadaref's questions strike home--what do I get for my $150 a year?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PIAA & Insurance LRZ Baseball 2 Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:48pm
Bad PR for PIAA umps Toadman15241 Baseball 22 Wed Oct 01, 2008 12:56am
for PIAA umpires Steve M Softball 0 Sun Aug 13, 2006 07:18am
PIAA Officials dacodee Basketball 2 Fri Sep 30, 2005 11:54am
PIAA Rule Franko Basketball 7 Tue Dec 09, 2003 01:54am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:35pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1