Official Arrested

[Rich]

Just another association that will eventually have to defend accusations that its officials are employees, not independent contractors.

If he was good enough to work varsity games before, how could an association keep him from working those games now without, essentially, restraining his trade?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

Great comments...

I was also hoping to get some comments from Association Board members and Assigners (JR?) who actually would have more decision making powers concerning issues as this one.

What's the saying?

I wouldn't be concerned with him unless he was found with dead woman or a live boy.

[Bearfanmike20]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

WHAT!!!!!

The media has a tendency to JUMP THE GUN...

Here in IL there was a guy who was accuse of raping and killing his own daughter... the media crusified this guy and he was let go because DNA evidence showed it wasn't him.

The media is quick to judge and will put even officials on the front page of the sports section for somthing that is percieved as wrong, but when they find out they are wrong they put in in the retraction section.

How many of you even know where to find the retractions??...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Bearfanmike20

The media has a tendency to JUMP THE GUN...

Here in IL there was a guy who was accuse of raping and killing his own daughter... the media crusified this guy and he was let go because DNA evidence showed it wasn't him.

The media is quick to judge and will put even officials on the front page of the sports section for somthing that is percieved as wrong, but when they find out they are wrong they put in in the retraction section.

How many of you even know where to find the retractions??...

Bearmike,

Mark has a tendency to be very sarcastic in all of his posts. He was likely agreeing with me while making a joke at the same time. It takes some time (for me years) to get his humor.

Peace

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Board members in local associations have nothing to do directly with whether someone does or does not work.

Trust me JRut...in this case, the board members do have a say.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

Trust me JRut...in this case, the board members do have a say.

In your area they have all the say. I am talking about my area and you did ask this question to people outside of your area. I am not speaking for what happens just in your area. I have no idea what happens in your area or in every local association. But a Board member of a local officiating association has no say as to whether someone works or not. Only the IHSA and the IHSA Official's Department have that say as to who can or cannot work games in our state. I guess assignors have a personal say if they work for them, but that is a personal decision.

I am sure that is the case where you live because a lot of associations are the key holders to who works, where they work and how they work. In my state that would open the IHSA up for violating independent contractor law and having responsibilities the IHSA is not equip to handle. That might not be the case where you live and that is why I mentioned what is OK where I live. And to give a good example of this, our Observer's Program the IHSA wants implemented. The IHSA made sure that the Observer's Program was not about post season assignments and just training. If they did make our Observer's Program about who gets or does not get post season assignments that could compromise all officials and their independent contractor classification. Then the IHSA might have to pay Worker's Compensation and have to adhere to other legal ramifications and there would be no IHSA as we know it. I would assume that the rules we are under as it relates to this is the very same thing. The only thing the IHSA can do is license you, after that it is up to the individual schools and conferences to hire you and even then they cannot violate certain laws.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

Great comments...

I was also hoping to get some comments from Association Board members and Assigners (JR?) who actually would have more decision making powers concerning issues as this one.

I am on the board of our 350 person organization. We have clauses in our Constitution/Bylaws regarding criminal conduct. Basically, a Felony change is an immediate suspension pending resolution...guilty or no-contest plea means permanent expulsion. A misdemeanor may carry the same consequences at the discretion of the board.

1. A member shall be automatically expelled upon conviction of or plea of no contest to a felony. While awaiting trial or other disposition of the matter, a member shall not be eligible for assignment of games.
2. A member may be subject to disciplinary action, including expulsion at the discretion of the Executive Board, upon conviction of or plea of no contest to a misdemeanor or other crime, or upon being charged with any crime, pending resolution of such charge.

Section 4. Appeal Process. There is no appeal from expulsion for a conviction of a felony; however, disciplinary action taken against a member pursuant to subsection 2 of Section 4 may be appealed by the member.

Also, we have the ability under the constitution to discipline someone (up to expulsion) for "conduct detrimental to the best interest of the association".

If the legal issues ended with no charges being filed, the charges dismissed, or not guilty, I'd have to give it some deep thought before I'd oppose his return....based on "best interests of the association". It would still be possible that I'd oppose the return of such a person even if found not guilty or charges dismissed but I've have to be absolutely convinced that they really did commit the crime....remembering that we don't have to have "proof beyond a resonable doubt" nor many of the other restrictions necessary in the arena of criminal law.

[Coltdoggs]

How do you know a recent partner that you worked with was not from another state where he had problems previously?

If the State association clears a guy on a background check then why the hell would I care whom I am working with (unless his officiating ability is less than desireable)...

I work with some of the same guys from time to time and I guess I'd say they are friends (at the facility)...we don't hang outside the gym together, save a couple...I have no idea what these guys are like in their personal lives....BUT..they are good guys to work with...

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I am on the board of our 350 person organization. We have clauses in our Constitution/Bylaws regarding criminal conduct. Basically, a Felony change is an immediate suspension pending resolution...guilty or no-contest plea means permanent expulsion. A misdemeanor may carry the same consequences at the discretion of the board.

1. A member shall be automatically expelled upon conviction of or plea of no contest to a felony. While awaiting trial or other disposition of the matter, a member shall not be eligible for assignment of games.
2. A member may be subject to disciplinary action, including expulsion at the discretion of the Executive Board, upon conviction of or plea of no contest to a misdemeanor or other crime, or upon being charged with any crime, pending resolution of such charge.

Section 4. Appeal Process. There is no appeal from expulsion for a conviction of a felony; however, disciplinary action taken against a member pursuant to subsection 2 of Section 4 may be appealed by the member.

Also, we have the ability under the constitution to discipline someone (up to expulsion) for "conduct detrimental to the best interest of the association".

If the legal issues ended with no charges being filed, the charges dismissed, or not guilty, I'd have to give it some deep thought before I'd oppose his return....based on "best interests of the association". It would still be possible that I'd oppose the return of such a person even if found not guilty or charges dismissed but I've have to be absolutely convinced that they really did commit the crime....remembering that we don't have to have "proof beyond a resonable doubt" nor many of the other restrictions necessary in the arena of criminal law.

Oregon, right?

Maybe the state SHOULD consider your officials employees and the association employers if you're going to restrain the trade of officials.

[jkumpire]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Bearmike,

Mark has a tendency to be very sarcastic in all of his posts. He was likely agreeing with me while making a joke at the same time. It takes some time (for me years) to get his humor.

Peace

What? You're kidding, you can't be serious, Mark is never sarcastic. He's the most serious guy I know.....

He would never do anything like that, would he?

[MadCityRef]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Oregon, right?

Maybe the state SHOULD consider your officials employees and the association employers if you're going to restrain the trade of officials.

The association can invite or "unvite" whom it pleases, but if that means a person can't get games from the attached assignor, you're right.

The OSAA requires membership in an association to insure training and knowledge, etc., in order to work games. The assignors are generally tied to the association.

Here's a link to the OAOA, a statewide assn. that has taken over a lot of what the OSAA used to do concerning its officials. This is on top of the locals. http://www.oreofficials.org/

How many states require a background check to get a license?
IL, FL yes.
WI no.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by MadCityRef

The association can invite or "unvite" whom it pleases, but if that means a person can't get games from the attached assignor, you're right.

The OSAA requires membership in an association to insure training and knowledge, etc., in order to work games. The assignors are generally tied to the association.

Here's a link to the OAOA, a statewide assn. that has taken over a lot of what the OSAA used to do concerning its officials. This is on top of the locals. http://www.oreofficials.org/

How many states require a background check to get a license?
IL, FL yes.
WI no.

Trust me, the WIAA will remove the license of someone who runs into certain trouble with the law.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Trust me, the WIAA will remove the license of someone who runs into certain trouble with the law.

They will also try to keep girls from playing basketball as well that have become pregnant during the school year. But that is another conversation for another day.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by [COLOR=red

RichMSN

Originally Posted by [COLOR=red

]Oregon, right?[/COLOR]

Maybe the state SHOULD consider your officials employees and the association employers if you're going to restrain the trade of officials.

Yes, Oregon.

We serve the schools. There are a lot of state laws concerning who is allowed to work in settings with students...including the background checks. Much of what we have just codifies how we're going to handle a situation where a person runs afoul of state/federal laws in between the legally required background checks. Basically, If they couldn't get any job for the school system, we can't send them to work a game in the school system.

Plus, we're not restraining a person's trade. They're more than welcome to take games through other sources....there are several...just not servicing the schools. All organizations have the right to set the rules of membership as long as they're not discriminatory based on the standard elements...and a being a felon is not a protected class.

We've had a few cases that have arisen over the years. We're not talking about freely restricting just anyone. The ones I know about involve drug dealing and statutory rape.