PIAA & Insurance

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

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?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

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.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

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.

We get our books and insurance from the SCHSL, plus they're now requiring background checks which of coursed was passed onto us.

[Rich]

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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

... officials are horribly underpaid and why fees stagnate for years on end ...

Just got this a few days ago:

Game Fees for 2019-2020
Scrimmage Fee: $150.00 (3 officials $50.00 each, 2 officials $75.00 each)
Varsity Fee: $98.47 (two person)
Sub Varsity Fee: $63.89 (junior varsity, freshman, and middle school)

In a high population concentration, geographically small, state like Connecticut, we're kept close to home and travel time/distance isn't an issue.

Automatic fee increase every year (no more yearly contract negotiations in smoke filled back rooms) is based on the average teacher raise in the state (1.3% this past year).

My local annual dues: $100.00, plus 7% assignment fee.

Maybe it's nice to officiate in 100% IAABO "Monopoly" Connecticut.

Maybe it's nice to have officials seated at the CIAC table.

Of course Connecticut does have a relatively high cost of living.

It's all relative.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Rich

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.

Completely agree.

Officials are the only ones that take heat for expecting to be paid commensurately with their services. No one bats an eye when state associations do shady stuff like the PIAA is doing, at least not to the extent that they are forced to do something about it. No one would dare suggest that the "poor" schools offset nominal pay increases for officials with higher gate fees, while they have no problem shelling out the funds for new stadiums, fields, gyms, scoreboards, and uniforms.

Too many officials without a backbone and the "for the kids" political correctness from all parties (often hypocritical at that) has led to all this crap.

[LRZ]

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?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by LRZ

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

If you're paying that much, I'd question it too. We pay less than half of that (around $70) and that covers the books, the background check, and liability insurance, and a few other things. Not sure what services PIAA is supposedly giving you for $150.

I retract my comments earlier given that it seems they're gouging you to start with. If they were charging minimal amounts and scraping by, I'd see where they'd need to cut the insurance (or something) to get by and cover the costs.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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?

Why should you as a tax payer foot the bill for any costs associated with hiring officials for sports contests?

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Why should you as a tax payer foot the bill for any costs associated with hiring officials for sports contests?

Because public schools have athletics, and public schools are funded by the taxpayers.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Why should you as a tax payer foot the bill for any costs associated with hiring officials for sports contests?

Because I have happily agreed to pay for the schools and the programs they offer. I have not agreed to pay for a frivolous lawsuit by people that likely knew they'd be unsuccessful but want to see if they could get a free lunch. If there were a way to charge them with the expenses, they should do that but that is likely to end up being more expensive and more difficult than cutting some expenses.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Because I have happily agreed to pay for the schools and the programs they offer. I have not agreed to pay for a frivolous lawsuit by people that likely knew they'd be unsuccessful but want to see if they could get a free lunch. If there were a way to charge them with the expenses, they should do that but that is likely to end up being more expensive and more difficult than cutting some expenses.

Why did the prevailing side in the court case not get awarded court costs and attorney fees?
That is how the costs of the litigation should have been covered.

[LRZ]

The appeal was from an administrative agency, the NLRB, captioned PIAA v. NLRB, after the NLRB ruled that officials are employees of PIAA. The appellate court reversed the decision of the NLRB, holding that officials are independent contractors, not employees. Although my labor law experience was about 40 years ago, I think that the rules about losers paying costs don't apply in such cases.