Louisiana Officials Possible Strike?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

The associations are comprised of members. If you don't know what the headcount would show, you have no idea what your association thinks.

Who makes the decision anyway -- an assignor who has a financial stake in assigning? A board of directors? This is a decision that should be made by the membership. One official, one vote. Nothing less.

Nothing like this ever came up before since I've been around, but the annual negotiations of subvarsity rates and travel pay are handled by some combination of the 2 assignors, and 1 or 2 other senior members. Had I not wanted to work, I suppose I had the option to turn my game back.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I don't live where you do and I also work more than HS ball. Doubt seriously I would have to quit.

Peace

Gee, Rut, everybody knows you don't live here. And everybody knows you work more than HS ball. But everybody except you, apparently, knows that those were the two things we were talking about. Everybody also knows that you have a habit of ducking things when you have no suitable answer.

I'll spell it out.

If you did live here, when it comes to high school ball, you would accept the current terms or quit.

OR?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Gee, Rut, everybody knows you don't live here. And everybody knows you work more than HS ball. But everybody except you, apparently, knows that those were the two things we were talking about. Everybody also knows that you have a habit of ducking things when you have no suitable answer.

Where I live is irrelevant to this discussion. I would not tolerate that anywhere. ANYWHERE!!!!

Originally Posted by just another ref

I'll spell it out.

If you did live here, when it comes to high school ball, you would accept the current terms or quit.

OR?

You are still trying to deflect issue I see. This is not about me where I live. This is about the pay that you accept is unacceptable. And to go and work those games in their place or to advocate such a thing is why you are getting paid less than many officials around the country.

Peace

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I see one reason as damage control. Unless something changes, when the "tweaked" proposal comes to a vote again, it will not separate who honored the previous agreement and who didn't. The longer the delay, the more trouble it would have been for the other side, the more potential bad blood, the more chance they would vote against the raise next time.

I have a lot of sympathy for the idea that you should honor the contract.

But here is the thing - they've been doing that for 21 years, and what have they gotten out of it? The lowest pay in the country, right?

I cannot possibly agree with your conclusion that the work stoppage could result in "the more chance they would vote against it next year". Seems to me that the last 21 years made it pretty clear that if things just go on as normal, there is basically zero change of it being passed "next time". After all, the last 20 "next times" saw no votes every time - why would you assume that the next "next time" would be different from the previous ones, as long as everyone just did the exact same thing?

Doing the same thing while expecting different results is not generally consider the mark of rational thinking.

I don't like the idea of people not honoring their contracts - on the other hand, desperate times and all that. It seems to me that it was pretty clear that if the officials did nothing, then they would have another year being paid a pittance, and the principals would laugh while they voted down yet another raise.

If in fact you get a raise this year, you have to assume that it came about as a result of the work stoppage, or at least the media attention it caused. After all, there was no work stoppage for 20 years, and they never gave you a raise.

[just another ref]

And again, no answer.

If you were in my place, what, specifically, would you do?

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by just another ref

And again, no answer.

If you were in my place, what, specifically, would you do?

Move.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Berkut

I cannot possibly agree with your conclusion that the work stoppage could result in "the more chance they would vote against it next year".

The conclusion was based on the fact that it was printed (I've read so much on this subject, that I don't remember where) that some principals who had stated intentions to vote for the raise, when they heard threats of a walkout, changed their votes. Hard to imagine that an actual walkout would change the votes back. All this occurred, of course, under an existing contract. Refusal to accept the renewal of this contract without a raise, should be easy for all parties to understand, and easy to support.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

And again, no answer.

If you were in my place, what, specifically, would you do?

I did not realize you needed an answer to a silly question.

I would not do what you are doing. I would not take games to help the schools out when another association is making a stand for all of us. I would not talk to a principal and undermine the position of getting higher pay. I would not take games at that rate and act like I do not have a choice (which you always have a choice). And most of all I would not work in that system and sit back and do nothing. And I certainly would not be talking about what others think when there has been no vote to find out what the other associations actually. About the only thing I would be doing that you will do is take the raise when it comes to me.

Peace

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The conclusion was based on the fact that it was printed (I've read so much on this subject, that I don't remember where) that some principals who had stated intentions to vote for the raise, when they heard threats of a walkout, changed their votes.

Why didn't these principals vote for the raise last year then, when there was no walkout? Sounds a bit fishy to me, the idea that they were so going to vote for a raise finally, and now they are NOT going to, because a minority f officials walked out?

How do they justify that, btw? Surely the decision about how to pay someone is important enough that they would not let the actions of a minority effect their decision making process....right? Why, that would not be very professional on their part.

Hard to imagine that an actual walkout would change the votes back. All this occurred, of course, under an existing contract. Refusal to accept the renewal of this contract without a raise, should be easy for all parties to understand, and easy to support.

What people say to the media does not often have much to do with how they actually feel though, as opposed to what they think will have the effect they wish to create.

And like I said - they didn't vote for a raise for 21 straight years. Seems to me like it was time to start doing *something* different, since taking it with a smile every year apparently wasn't working.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Berkut

Why didn't these principals vote for the raise last year then, when there was no walkout? Sounds a bit fishy to me, the idea that they were so going to vote for a raise finally, and now they are NOT going to, because a minority f officials walked out?

How do they justify that, btw? Surely the decision about how to pay someone is important enough that they would not let the actions of a minority effect their decision making process....right? Why, that would not be very professional on their part.


What people say to the media does not often have much to do with how they actually feel though, as opposed to what they think will have the effect they wish to create.

And like I said - they didn't vote for a raise for 21 straight years. Seems to me like it was time to start doing *something* different, since taking it with a smile every year apparently wasn't working.

I know almost nothing about the proposal for a raise is made or when it normally comes up, if there is a normal time for such matters. The last raise, in spite of publications to the contrary, was not 21 years ago, but was in 2007, when our game fees actually doubled. That's right. In 2006 we got 18 bucks a game.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I did not realize you needed an answer to a silly question.

I would not do what you are doing. I would not take games to help the schools out when another association is making a stand for all of us. I would not talk to a principal and undermine the position of getting higher pay. I would not take games at that rate and act like I do not have a choice (which you always have a choice). And most of all I would not work in that system and sit back and do nothing. And I certainly would not be talking about what others think when there has been no vote to find out what the other associations actually. About the only thing I would be doing that you will do is take the raise when it comes to me.

Peace

Silly statements provoke silly questions. You say you would not do what I do. I said you would do it or quit. You said you wouldn't quit. I said, what would you do then? And you cleared it up nicely by giving this solution. Very helpful.

[APG]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I know almost nothing about the proposal for a raise is made or when it normally comes up, if there is a normal time for such matters. The last raise, in spite of publications to the contrary, was not 21 years ago, but was in 2007, when our game fees actually doubled. That's right. In 2006 we got 18 bucks a game.

There were people who accepted $18 for a varsity game in 2006? Are you kidding me? You're basically paying the teams to officiate at that point. People aren't kidding when they say Louisiana basketball officiating is behind the times.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Silly statements provoke silly questions. You say you would not do what I do. I said you would do it or quit. You said you wouldn't quit. I said, what would you do then? And you cleared it up nicely by giving this solution. Very helpful.

For one I do not live in your system type. We do not get games by association and think that those that do are one of the problems of these types of situation. I like the model we live under where just like the NCAA, if the assignor of the conference likes you, they hire you. If they do not like you, they do not hire you. And if I do not want to work for someone, I don't. And it appears that you think that you cannot on some level reject games or you must work no matter what other things you have going on in your life. This entire discussion you have tried to make this sound like you have no choices in this situation. Are you telling me that if you have a date you do not want work you must work because the association tells you to? You even said if I was in your area I would have to do what you do…….Really? I would have to? I have no choice when or how to work at all? So if I have another activity I must work the amount of days you do? I guess many of you guys do not have families, jobs or other activities if you cannot decide when or how often you want to officiate.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I would not take games at that rate and act like I do not have a choice

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And it appears that you think that you cannot on some level reject games or you must work no matter what other things you have going on in your life. This entire discussion you have tried to make this sound like you have no choices in this situation. Are you telling me that if you have a date you do not want work you must work because the association tells you to? You even said if I was in your area I would have to do what you do…….Really? I would have to? I have no choice when or how to work at all? So if I have another activity I must work the amount of days you do? I guess many of you guys do not have families, jobs or other activities if you cannot decide when or how often you want to officiate.

Peace

Steady, Rut. Try one more time to concentrate. This is not about rejecting individual games. I can do that, no problem. Check the first statement above again. You say something like that, then when called on it, you write a whole paragraph which addresses everything but that. I should be used to it by now.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Steady, Rut. Try one more time to concentrate. This is not about rejecting individual games. I can do that, no problem. Check the first statement above again. You say something like that, then when called on it, you write a whole paragraph which addresses everything but that. I should be used to it by now.

Can you spell Vaseline? As that is what you need as that is what the Principals should be using on you as they take complete advantage of your time and your services.

Peace