Louisiana Officials Possible Strike?

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The expectation was bi-yearly pay raises of $3/official every 2 years starting in 2007. Nothing has been done to date. It was already explained in the one story linked that there are no contracts with any individual officials in La and no officials are employed by the LHSAA. The contracts are with different associations. And if an association can't find enough sub-contractors to meet committments, oh well.

I see. So the individual referees may be out of Dodge, but it certainly won't be "oh well" for the associations. They will face fines for lack of performance on their contractual obligations. This probably ends with all the current associations having to dissolve in order to not pay thousands of dollars in damages to the state association (or whoever they contract with).

My point is this is not a real strike (as a real strike involves a union and an employer) and the associations do not enjoy the protections the law provides to striking unions.

And if the state has not met it's contractual obligations in regards to a pay raise, sue them, but defaulting on your contract is always going to end up biting you in the butt.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I see. So the individual referees may be out of Dodge, but it certainly won't be "oh well" for the associations. They will face fines for lack of performance on their contractual obligations. This probably ends with all the current associations having to dissolve in order to not pay thousands of dollars in damages to the state association (or whoever they contract with).

My point is this is not a real strike (as a real strike involves a union and an employer) and the associations do not enjoy the protections the law provides to striking unions.

And if the state has not met it's contractual obligations in regards to a pay raise, sue them, but defaulting on your contract is always going to end up biting you in the butt.

I'm not a lawyer but I think a lot would depend on the nature of the contract signed. Unless one of those associations is completely clueless, they should have some rider in their contract re:availability of people willing to work at any specific time.

Nope, this isn't a strike of any kind. It's an uprising.

Seriously, neither the LHSAA or the various officials associations can force their members to work. That why somewhere along the line the LHSAA needs to sit down and straighten things out. Unless I'm reading all of those newspaper links wrong, the officials thought they had come to some kind of an agreement back in 2007.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I'm not a lawyer but I think a lot would depend on the nature of the contract signed. Unless one of those associations is completely clueless, they should have some rider in their contract re:availability of people willing to work at any specific time.

That depends on how good their lawyers are.

Nope, this isn't a strike of any kind. It's an uprising.

And long overdue at that

Seriously, neither the LHSAA or the various officials associations can force their members to work. That why somewhere along the line the LHSAA needs to sit down and straighten things out. Unless I'm reading all of those newspaper links wrong, the officials thought they had come to some kind of an agreement back in 2007.

That's true, but the courts can enforce contracts. What they may end up entailing I can't say for sure but it's not likely to be pleasant for the associations, especially if they are instructing officials not to work.

I agree that LHSAA needs to step up to their 2007 agreement and get with the program.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I agree that LHSAA needs to step up to their 2007 agreement and get with the program.

Both parties need to come to some kind of an agreement that is acceptable to each other. And the officials don't need to kill themselves internally while an agreement is being reached either. Association vs. association in-fighting can't possibly do any good for any of the LA officials imo.

Do the math. Say a team plays 30 games a year...15 at home, 15 away. The raise was $3/official over 2 years based on a 3-man crew. That's $9/game X 15 games = $145 a year. I just can't believe that any high school is that hard pressed that it would have to drop a major varsity sport over $145/year.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Both parties need to come to some kind of an agreement that is acceptable to each other. And the officials don't need to kill themselves internally while an agreement is being reached either. Association vs. association in-fighting can't possibly do any good for any of the LA officials imo.

Do the math. Say a team plays 30 games a year...15 at home, 15 away. The raise was $3/official over 2 years based on a 3-man crew. That's $9/game X 15 games = $145 a year. I just can't believe that any high school is that hard pressed that it would have to drop a major varsity sport over $145/year.

100% agree. Although you would have to double that since there usually is a boys team as well.
Plus, have you seen the going rate of a Hot Dog or Nacho these days? Those boosters are out to get you!! Seriously!! What happened to $1 hot dogs $.50 popcorn and $1.50 nachos!!!

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Judtech

100% agree. Although you would have to double that since there usually is a boys team as well.
Plus, have you seen the going rate of a Hot Dog or Nacho these days? Those boosters are out to get you!! Seriously!! What happened to $1 hot dogs $.50 popcorn and $1.50 nachos!!!

Would also be interested in knowing how the teacher's union fared with their salary increase negotiations over the past years????

edit: Louisiana teacher salaries have risen 45.4% over the past ten years. Now I know why you're on the bottom of the totem pole boys

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

That's true, but the courts can enforce contracts. What they may end up entailing I can't say for sure but it's not likely to be pleasant for the associations, especially if they are instructing officials not to work.

I doubt it would go that way. Associations, for the most part, are small non-profits will a very small bank account. The second they get sued (lacking any insurance that will step in), they dissolve. They just don't have the resources to involve lawyers. The schools will know that. And guess what, new associations will form with mostly the same people, and the schools will be in the same boat, except they will have spent the initial money on lawyers.

[Rich]

I have contracts for all my games for this season, next season, and for a fair number of games in 2012-13. They specify how much we will be paid for those games and I have the choice whether to sign them or not sign them.

I worry what would happen here if schools and conferences would try to cut pay for officials. I think many officials would buy the party line of "the schools have no money" and would work for considerably less money. With no real organized associations (we have associations, but membership is voluntary and is only for training and networking purposes) the games would go on.

I was an assignor for an adult baseball league with 44 teams and a lot of attitude. The umpires were underpaid and took way too much abuse. When I tried to bridge the gap between the league and the assignors and get a fair raise for the umpires, I had *umpires* tell me to back off. Mainly cause they were the ones that had been around forever and were buddies with the teams and their management.

Me? I could work for $31, I guess, but I won't. I have told the occasional AD that I'd be willing to cut my pay from $60 to $45 to $50 for 2-3 years if there was a real effort to transition to 3-person officiating across the board. That would cut some of the effect on the schools while they try to figure out how to raise the additional funds down the road. Some have thought this was a good idea, but they're in the minority -- they're happy having to only pay 2 officials.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I see. So the individual referees may be out of Dodge, but it certainly won't be "oh well" for the associations. They will face fines for lack of performance on their contractual obligations. This probably ends with all the current associations having to dissolve in order to not pay thousands of dollars in damages to the state association (or whoever they contract with).

My point is this is not a real strike (as a real strike involves a union and an employer) and the associations do not enjoy the protections the law provides to striking unions.

And if the state has not met it's contractual obligations in regards to a pay raise, sue them, but defaulting on your contract is always going to end up biting you in the butt.

To elaborate on this point: The officials/sub contractors make up the Associations who contracted with the Schools.
So say for instance the "Bayou Officials Association" or BOA signs a contract to cover games for the "Riverboat District" games at such and such a rate and all that other fine stuff. (SIDEBAR: I can't BELIEVE there is no fine print detailing the fines and penalties of BOC by either party in the contracts) The BOA's obviously determines they have enough officials in their stable to meet the contract b4 signing.
Now if the BOA's officials get "Stripe Sickness" and don't work that would cause the BOA to be unable to cover the games they are contractually obligated to cover in the Riverboat District. It is the BOA who will take the heat not the officials.
HOWEVER, and this is "the rub", what happens if/when the labor dispute gets resolved? If the BOA is found in BOC with the Riverboat District, there will most likely be damages (def. compensatory and maybe punitive) awarded the Riverboat District that the BOA is responsible for paying. Now, the BOA is getting paid $75/game and all the officials are happy. Unfortunately for them, the BOA is still on the hook for the damages caused by the "sub contractors" which caused the BOA to be in BOC with the RD. (Say THAT 10xs fast!) What is the BOA to do? One option would be to raise whatever fees they charge their members/sub contractors to be members of the BOA. They could file bankruptcy, which then causes a whole BUNCH of issues. Or they could just dissolve the BOA. However, that would necessitate a new association being formed, and may cause angst with the Schools as they will now NOT be getting money from the "old" association and still having to pay higher rates to the "new" assocaition (Cue WHO song)
Now, if the "sub contractors" continued to work under the existing contract until it expires all of that is moot. When the schools come around with a "new" contract offer for a whopping $36.50 + a glass of water, the BOA can say thank you but no thank you to the schools. If EVERY association does this, the schools will then have to 1) SERIOUSLY negotiate a new deal with the association 2) Re Vamp how they obtain their officials. So instead of contracting with an association, they contract with individuals or 3) Have the players call their own! Finally, the BOA would not be on the hook for any damages caused the schools and the schools would NOT have a bargaining chip (fines, damages etc) they can use in contract negotiations with the BOA.

Yep, I still like JAR's thought process.

[26 Year Gap]

I guess if associations have contracts with certain schools or districts, that certain other associations shouldn't be poaching those contracts thinking that if they work those games they might get more contracts down the line. If they want to work their own games, that is one thing, but going to other areas is just plain wrong IMO.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

I guess if associations have contracts with certain schools or districts, that certain other associations shouldn't be poaching those contracts thinking that if they work those games they might get more contracts down the line. If they want to work their own games, that is one thing, but going to other areas is just plain wrong IMO.

While I'd hope they would stick together, their right to pick up the games others are refusing is basic free trade and competition.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I see. So the individual referees may be out of Dodge, but it certainly won't be "oh well" for the associations. They will face fines for lack of performance on their contractual obligations. This probably ends with all the current associations having to dissolve in order to not pay thousands of dollars in damages to the state association (or whoever they contract with).

My point is this is not a real strike (as a real strike involves a union and an employer) and the associations do not enjoy the protections the law provides to striking unions.

And if the state has not met it's contractual obligations in regards to a pay raise, sue them, but defaulting on your contract is always going to end up biting you in the butt.

THERE IS NO CONTRACT! We have the same system here as they do in LA. The officials association and the member schools are part of the state association. There is no contract between the schools, the officals or the association. It's simply in the bylaws of the state association that certified local associations will train and provide officials and are assigned to specific schools. Member schools will only use state certified officials. That's it, the end of it.

And if they choose not to work they can certainly do so. You can call it a strike, wlakout or whatever, but they certainly have the standing to do it. They are independent contractors. They work at their own pleasure and the pleasure of the schools. Schools must use LHSAA officials...at least until the emergency measure this week.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

THERE IS NO CONTRACT! We have the same system here as they do in LA. The officials association and the member schools are part of the state association. There is no contract between the schools, the officals or the association.

Once a game is assigned and accepted, I think there's a contract (but IANAL), even if there's no written document entitled "Contract."

So, it's unclear to me whether they are (or were) not working games that they had previously accpeted, or if they just weren't taking any new games.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Once a game is assigned and accepted, I think there's a contract (but IANAL), even if there's no written document entitled "Contract."

So, it's unclear to me whether they are (or were) not working games that they had previously accpeted, or if they just weren't taking any new games.

It's a completely internal situation, with schools and officials both being part of the state association. It's like a dispute between Coke and Coke Zero.

As an LA official said earlier, associations are assigned to specific schools, that's pretty much the extent of a "contract." All I have to do is turn the game back in and I don't have to work it. If no one else is willing to work it, then the booking agent informs the school he doesn't have officials for the game.

At this point, it looks like they may have reached an agreement for most associations to go back to work.

LHSAA holds emergency meeting