Corona Waivers?

[SC Official]

Anyone else being asked to sign these? Basically stating that we won't sue the association/conference/assigner if we get the virus.

I'd love to know how a referee would prove that (s)he contracted the virus at a game as opposed to a grocery store, restaurant, etc. At the same time, aren't these waivers as worthless as the paper they're printed on if there was a legitimate grievance?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Anyone else being asked to sign these? Basically stating that we won't sue the association/conference/assigner if we get the virus.

I'd love to know how a referee would prove that (s)he contracted the virus at a game as opposed to a grocery store, restaurant, etc. At the same time, aren't these waivers as worthless as the paper they're printed on if there was a legitimate grievance?

Not at any level yet. There was some talk about some college conferences asking for waivers, but this has yet to be decided or the process started.

Peace

[LRZ]

SC, your second question first: if an official were to file a lawsuit, the waiver would be interposed as a defense; whether the defense would prevail would be for a jury to determine.

Your first question goes to the matter of proof, the quantum and weight of evidence offered by the official/plaintiff to show where and how he/she contracted the virus. This, again, is for a jury to decide.

Moreover, even if a waiver is deemed valid, the official/plaintiff could argue that the defendant(s) (schools, conferences, assigners, in descending order of potential liability, in my judgment) were grossly negligent, thereby liable despite the waiver.

Waivers are not to be signed or ignored lightly. I will not officiate any school that requires a waiver.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by LRZ

Waivers are not to be signed or ignored lightly. I will not officiate any school that requires a waiver.

Why not?

I haven't been asked by individual schools (yet) to sign something.

[LRZ]

Waivers operate as an additional defense in a lawsuit: a plaintiff must prove causation by a preponderance of the evidence (the burden of proof), but with a waiver, a plaintiff would also have to overcome the assertion of assumption of the risk. Without an executed waiver, defendants have one less defense. Why would I voluntarily concede that benefit to schools?

As a lawyer, I am not interested in giving potential defendants a shield against liability.

More hypothetically (please note the conjecture here), schools might be motivated to "hide" behind waivers instead of fully complying with best practices to avoid the spread of the virus.

[SNIPERBBB]

If you were of the mind to sue someone because you think they gave you the Rona, you shouldn't be signing the waiver anyways. It's kinda a dirtbag move in my opinion to sign something with no intent to honor it. Especially knowing full well there's. Kthing anyone can do to stop you from getting the Rona, the flu or any other sickness. If you're worried about getting sick, stay home.

[LRZ]

It's not that the official does not intend to honor a waiver, but if facts came to light afterwards, showing that other parties did not live up to their end of the bargain (ie, maintain "best practices" to avoid the spread of the virus), then the official signed under a misconception and, arguably, the waiver is invalid.

"Especially knowing full well there's nothing anyone can do to stop you from getting the Rona...." This is patently false. There ARE things that can be done. And please don't conflate COVID-19 with "the flu or any other sickness." At least until we know more conclusively about it, and perhaps have a vaccine, we are dealing with something radically different. To suggest otherwise is to ignore the science.

As this conversation is beginning to infringe on a political argument, I'll say no more.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

If you were of the mind to sue someone because you think they gave you the Rona, you shouldn't be signing the waiver anyways. It's kinda a dirtbag move in my opinion to sign something with no intent to honor it. Especially knowing full well there's. Kthing anyone can do to stop you from getting the Rona, the flu or any other sickness. If you're worried about getting sick, stay home.

People might sign something, then figure out that they were not protected or they were neglagant in their application and then sue. Again, you do not know what might be an issue until you are faced with it directly. You can sign a waiver and find out there were not things promised or put into place to protect those. Like there is no plan in most area for testing or no way of knowing who has been tested. So it could be people could be infecting each other and nothign was put in place to protect everyone like the pro sports and now some college sports. Remember there are people that think this is all a hoax and might find out later how much of a hoax it is not.

Peace

[SNIPERBBB]

The thing is, even if all those promised things were done, you can still get it. That's the problem with these threats of lawsuits. Unless you force everyone to wear full hazmat suits, theres no way to prevent the Rona or the flu.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

The thing is, even if all those promised things were done, you can still get it. That's the problem with these threats of lawsuits. Unless you force everyone to wear full hazmat suits, theres no way to prevent the Rona or the flu.

There is no guarantee I won't die in my next car accident, but that doesn't mean my car's manufacturer should be let off the hook if they are installing faulty brake lines. Should Boeing be let off the hook b/c there is no guarantee a plane won't crash? There are things that fall in between wearing full hazmat suits and having absolutely no safety protocols at all. Why does it have to be one extreme or the other? If you find out a venue knowingly allowed CV-19 positive personnel to work the table and/or maintain the official's changing area, you don't think that's worthy invalidating a waiver?

If a venue does what is legally required or reasonably expected, then a lawsuit would be frivolous.

[SNIPERBBB]

You can't blame the manufacturer for things they can't control. Bad parts you can.

The safety protocols most people even hospitals are following are practically worthless other than quarantining people that have been exposed or showing symptoms.


In the case of a person knowingly having covid and being allowed in you'd own the school and the guy's house. The odds of that happening is less than zero.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

You can't blame the manufacturer for things they can't control. Bad parts you can.

The safety protocols most people even hospitals are following are practically worthless other than quarantining people that have been exposed or showing symptoms.


In the case of a person knowingly having covid and being allowed in you'd own the school and the guy's house. The odds of that happening is less than zero.

I'm not sure your qualifications to assess the effect of safety protocols. I know you work in a hospital, but I know plenty of people who work in hospitals who don't agree with your assessment.

There are plenty of sleazy basketball organizers out there and there have been plenty of stories of people who knew they were positive engaging in group activities.

Either way, waivers don't innoculate venues/organizers from negligent conduct. No different than those camp waivers we all sign and then getting injured b/c of negligence by the host venue. I'm still suing to compensated.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... some school systems/schools/grades/classrooms in Connecticut have had to temporarily close (moving to online learning) due to COVID cases. If COVID has this effect on curricular activities, what effect will we see on extracurricular activities, especially when people start moving back indoors as the weather gets colder?

The NFHS, in explaining the importance of high school sports (and other similar activities) during this COVID "plague" when some might downplay the value of high school sports compared to the major health implications presented by such, recently advised schools to refer to high school sports (and other similar activities) as "co-curricular" rather than "extra-curricular".

Meaning that high school sports, marching band, debate club, drama club, etc., are just as important as algebra, literature, biology, U.S. history, art, geometry, chemistry, world history, wood shop, accounting, trigonometry, auto mechanics, physics, foreign language (sorry, world language), etc., as we try to navigate through this COVID "plague".

If a school can set COVID policies to keep students healthy in calculus class, they must also be able to set COVID policies to keep students healthy while playing football.

The NFHS has often in the past referred to high school sports as "co-curricular" activities, but has now re-emphasized this language in this age of COVID, and COVID's effect on schools and classroom learning.

According to the NFHS, "co-curricular" activities, while not compulsory for gradation and not graded, are just as educationally important (and worthy of occurring in this age of COVID) as traditional "curricular" classroom academic subjects that are graded and are compulsory for gradation.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by LRZ

Why would I voluntarily concede that benefit to schools?

To answer the question, some would concede the benefit in order to work at the school. Not to be snide or argue, but officials concede things all the time in order to work at schools, many of which are considered inherent risks.

[LRZ]

Originally Posted by bucky

To answer the question, some would concede the benefit in order to work at the school. Not to be snide or argue, but officials concede things all the time in order to work at schools, many of which are considered inherent risks.

That may be, but there are risks and then there are BIG RISKS, like the risk of serious, life-threatening illness or death. And, at my level, we're not talking about sacrificing college-level fees by refusing to sign a waiver and not working a game. I'm retired, I don't need the money to live on, and, at my age, the amount I earn is hardly enough to risk my health.

I'm more leery about basketball than soccer, my other officiating sport. We have not heard anything about waivers in soccer, which begins next week. If the league and its schools don't require waivers for soccer--and we still don't know for sure--who knows if they will do likewise for basketball, being played indoors, in a smaller space, and with closer proximity to players. There is still a lot of confusion and uncertainty, and we have not received definitive protocols from the state or league.