yes, that's exactly what I was wondering.

Do you know of any examples of refs who moved up from the WNBA to the NBA? I think Violet Palmer did, but that's the only one I can think of...

thanks again for all the responses on this. Very interesting!

They have to pay the same for refs for men's and women's games, but it sure ain't because of Title IX.

(Hint: try civil rights law and pay parity.)

Violet Palmer was in the NBA before the WNBA was an issue. She was a D1 official before she got the opportunity in the NBA.

Peace

The WNBA's first season was the summer of '97. Violet was hired by the NBA for the '97-'98 season.

Violet's Wiki entry says that she has reffed WNBA games as well. I actually don't recall seeing her, so I'm not sure whether that's true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Palmer

I'm not totally sure about that (I'm actually a lawyer), and I'm not sure what civil rights law would be applicable.

You would think that if colleges can legally pay men's coaches more than women's coaches (which they can), then they can also pay men's refs more than women's refs.

But maybe they just don't, for whatever reason.

Colleges and HS aside, I assume that there's a huge pay disparity between WNBA and NBA refs. Anyone know?

Palmer might have worked some WNBA games, but she was hired in the NBA first if I am not mistaken. These are two different seasons. Dee Kantner was hired the same year that Palmer was and both came from the D1 ranks and had worked Final Fours in their career.

Peace

Yep. And Dee was fired from the NBA after being one of the lowest-rated officials in the league.

She soon found other work... as director of WNBA officiating.

As a women's basketball fan, I've never found that very comforting!

Actually Dee went back to college basketball first. She later took a position as the WNBA Director of Officiating. She still works as a D1 official from my understanding. I believe the year after the NBA fired her; she worked in the Final Four the following year.

Peace

Is the talent better on the men's or women's side? I think this question is a lot like asking "Who played against tougher competition: Tiger or Jack?" The top 5 or 6 golfers that Jack played against are much better than the top 5 or 6 golfers that Tiger plays against. But from top to bottom, the field today is much more talented than the group of golfers that Jack played against.

I think this is a pretty good analogy to officiating. I think that at the top, the talent is pretty close to equal on each side. There are probably just as many exceptionally talented women's officials as there are exceptionally talented men's officials. However, from top to bottom, I think there is probably more talent on the men's side.


I don't know if it's easier, but I do know that people get accepted to work women's games that I don't think would possibly be able to work even a low-level men's game. And I have heard (although I have no experience to back it up) that a talented official will move up the ranks much quicker on the women's side.

Yes. No question. Maybe not at the very top levels -- hey, D1 is D1. But at the D3 level, I think it is definitely perceived as less prestigious.

Somebody also mentioned whether it's possible to do both men's and women's, or whether it's possible to cross over from women's to men's. I can't give a definitive answer, but I've had a D1 assignor tell me that if an official works women's games, he can't hire that official to work men's games, b/c he'll get calls from the coaches asking why he sent a women's official to the game. For what it's worth.

At the camp I attended last year, one of the speakers said that if you choose to do college, you have to choose either men or women to officiate and concentrate on breaking in there. He said that very, very few cross at the D1 level.

The WNBA is kinda of like the AAA training grounds for NBA Officials with Womens NCAA being AA.

Wasn't Joe DeRosa from the NBA originally a women's collegiate official--before there was a WNBA?

I think the main reason for being paid the same is obviously the conference rules (which generally set pay rates for officials - at least at the major conference level). That said, I think there's a much better argument that the jobs of men's and women's officials are the same than saying the jobs of men's and women's coaches are the same.

**Correction/Letal Revelation** - Perhaps you could back me up on this one, womens_hoops - pay parity laws would require that a male or female working the same level would have to be paid the same, and doesn't apply to the gender of the job. (A little bit of introduction to Title IX in soc. classes can be a dangerous thing. :-p)

This isn't my area of expertise, and I have only done cursory research, but my basic thought is:

Suppose Ref-A is a woman and Ref-B is a man. If Ref-A and Ref-B both ref in the men's game, and if they both have comparable experience, etc., then you have to pay them the same under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which applies to all employers.

If, however, Ref-A works in the women's game and Ref-B works in the men's game... it's a little less clear to me that Title VII would require parity. The employer (assuming that there'e one employer covering both games) could argue that different salary levels were based not on the the employee's gender, but rather on some other non-discriminatory factor (men's game is more profitable, more challenging, or it's a more competitive hiring environment so you have to pay more, or something).

I'm really not sure how the latter case would turn out. Seems like you could argue it either way.

In practice, it seems like most schools/conferences would want to pay the same anyway, possibly just because they think it's the right thing to do. And schools (especially state schools) might have additional requirements from state law that go above and beyond federal law.

(I'm not clear whether Title IX applies to this stuff at all. Title IX applies only to educational institutions receiving federal funds. It's unclear whether it has any application to the NCAA and conferences, which don't receive federal funds. I was actually looking at this the other day with respect to the mascot thing -- that's a Title VI issue, and it's similar to Title IX, and there's some case law saying that while it applies to schools, it doesn't apply to the NCAA.)

I guess that's a long way of saying: I'm not totally sure what the law requires.

Which is part of why I was wondering whether folks here know whether, for any reason, refs on the women's side make less or the same as on the men's side.

I heard today, incidentally, that refs in the WNBA get about $750 per game, which someone said is about the same as D1 tournament play. I think the WNBA refs (unlike the NBA refs) don't have a Collective Bargaining Agreement, and so don't have regular salaries.

I'm not really sure how many games the typical WNBA ref works, but with only 34 games per team in the season, it probably ends up to be quite a bit less than NBA refs.

I think I'm agreeing with you completely, but my legal reasoning isn't well enough developed so that you could understand what I wrote.