|
|||
Game Fees ...
Quote:
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.
__________________
"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." (John 3:16) “I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36) Last edited by BillyMac; Mon Jul 29, 2019 at 11:26am. |
|
|||
Quote:
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. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR |
|
|||
Quote:
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.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Because public schools have athletics, and public schools are funded by the taxpayers.
__________________
Powder blue since 1998. Longtime forum lurker. Umpiring Goals: Call the knee strike accurately (getting the low pitch since 2017)/NCAA D1 postseason/ISF-WBSC Certification/Nat'l Indicator Fraternity(completed) "I'm gonna call it ASA for the foreseeable future. You all know what I mean." |
|
|||
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.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
This really gets overblown far more than it actually occurs or has practical impact in reality. By rule, a coach in every NFHS state is entitled to ask for a coach/referee conference. All this does is require the books to be there for a quick reference in the extremely unlikely event that it isn't clear, a small extension of the existing coach/referee conference. It almost never gets to that point - but the very few times it has, having the books there has proven invaluable.
|
|
|||
Quote:
Which sport does this reference apply to? |
|
|||
Quote:
That is how the costs of the litigation should have been covered. |
|
|||
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.
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR |
|
|||
Just to clarify: the initial "case" was not a law suit, but a complaint filed with the NLRB. After the NLRB ruled in the officials' favor, finding them (us) employees, not independent contractors, PIAA appealed that decision to the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, which hears administrative agency appeals. That court decided, 3-0, we are not employees but independent contractors.*
After the NLRB decision, there was a parallel class action law suit filed by several officials, claiming PIAA was in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act for not paying minimum wage. That was recently settled for a $260,000 award to the plaintiffs. I assume the plaintiff lawyers will get their cut, then the remainder will be divided among the officials who opted in to the class action. Regardless of the merits of the two legal actions, regardless of who pays how much in taxes, and regardless of the value of PIAA membership, there remains the propriety of PIAA's timing, announcing the end of our insurance with little time for officials to scout out meaningful alternatives. *Like issues in sports, where the rules don't specifically apply to novel situations, the traditional test for employee status does not really address the conditions under which we work in PA. We must be PIAA-certified to work school games, we're assigned by assigners who contract with leagues to provide officials, we're paid by the individual schools, all of which is governed by PIAA rules. PIAA also controls the rules, mechanics and even our uniforms--that is, the terms and conditions of employment. (Think of it this way: a labor union--say, carpenters--decrees that all union carpenters must wear blue pants, red shirts with the union logo, and black shoes. Appropriate?) The original argument before the NLRB was novel and unusual, not frivolous. Last edited by LRZ; Tue Jul 30, 2019 at 10:18am. |
|
|||
Well, all I know is this. The "independent contractor" argument is complete hogwash in many instances. Just because you are called one in form doesn't mean you are in substance.
Assigners and state associations use this copout when it's convenient for them while exercising a level of control on officials that, more often than not, can be construed as one of an employee/employer relationship. |
Bookmarks |
|
|
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 |