Louisiana Officials Possible Strike?

[Jurassic Referee]

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.

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?

Or you can do something about it like the guys who refused games and put their azzes on the line so that you could get a pay raise next year. Instead of backing them, you back-stabbed them.

Sorry, JAR, but there it is.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Or you can do something about it like the guys who refused games and put their azzes on the line so that you could get a pay raise next year. Instead of backing them, you back-stabbed them.

Sorry, JAR, but there it is.

Like I said, I would've put my bags away for the year before I would've stepped in and worked other association's games.

I don't have that system here. I get offered games, I get a contract to sign, and I can choose whether to accept games or not accept games. One factor for me is the pay and whether those schools pay travel. For example, in baseball I only work 4 conferences because the games start at 4:45PM or 5PM. And I wouldn't drive more than 50 miles or so from Madison if the conference didn't pay for travel.

So all this is hypothetical for me, but I have worked in an association system before and I can't imagine such a scenario happening and not have the chance to vote on whether the association wants to join the others. You mean *nobody* in your group asked that question? Do you guys not meet?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Like I said, I would've put my bags away for the year before I would've stepped in and worked other association's games.

So all this is hypothetical for me, but I have worked in an association system before and I can't imagine such a scenario happening and not have the chance to vote on whether the association wants to join the others. You mean *nobody* in your group asked that question? Do you guys not meet?

Part of the agreement that we have with all of our neighboring associations is that we will never send officials into each other's area without the approval of that area's association. The last thing that any of us want is to get into official vs. official warfare. Our local constitution also is specifically written so that the members make ALL major decisions by majority vote. And with e-mail, etc., you can have a vote immediately on just about anything.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Part of the agreement that we have with all of our neighboring associations is that we will never send officials into each other's area without the approval of that area's association.

Once upon a time, in the Land of Steady Habits, Connecticut was a 98% IAABO state. The only exception was a very small non-IAABO association that was a vestige of what used to be an association that only worked girls games, before local Connecticut IAABO boards started working girls games about thirty years ago.

Over the years, more and more schools wanted their girls games worked by the same board (IAABO) that worked their boys games, in most cases to make the paperwork more convenient for athletic directors. As IAABO, now both boys and girls, got larger, the "girls" association got smaller. Near the end, the "girls" association was only covering less than a dozen schools.

That's when it started getting nasty. If a coach, or athletic director, that used the "girls" officials didn't like the way that their girls games were being called, they switched over to IAABO. If a coach, or athletic director, that used the IAABO officials didn't like the way that their girls games were being called, they switched over to the "girls" association. In a few cases, when athletic directors, or coaches, really got pissed, they used the "girls" officials to work their boys games. This went on for several years.

Eventually, the "girls" association only had about two dozen officials, and was only covering about a half dozen schools, getting, for the most part, only girls games. Finally about four years ago, the "girls" association offered to merge with our local IAABO board. Some of our guys didn't want to merge, but wanted to exterminate the other association. However, reasonable minds took over, and now we're all just one big happy family, and we're going to live happily ever after. Don't you just love monopolies?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jurassic referee

or you can do something about it like the guys who refused games and put their azzes on the line so that you could get a pay raise next year. Instead of backing them, you back-stabbed them.

Sorry, jar, but there it is.

+1

[LouisianaDave]

The attitudes of JAR is the reason that Louisiana is so cheaply paid. I work for the Baton Rouge association and we held a special meeting and the members voted to be unavailable. All this talk of contracts is irrelevant. The way the association works, the principals enter into an agreement with an officials association to use their officials. Then the association must use the an assignor paid for and hired by the principals. On Feb 1, all except for 3 officials were unavailable to work and therefore games had to be postponed. As independent contractors we have the right to be available or unavailable.

As JAR state principals voted down the pay raise due to the threat of a strike. The principals figured there wasnt enough unity amongst officials to actually follow through on the walkout, but when the games got postponed the officials showed the principals there are more guys willing to stay home(me) than guys who were working (JAR). Even though 4 associations sat that is a misleading quote. There were 4 association who were done for the season. For one Tuesday night the officials of the following cities sat Shreveport, Monroe, Hammond, Alexandria, Baton Rouge, Thibidoux and a majority of New Orleans. Lafayette didnt vote and worked and Lake Charles worked.

So by uniting as one, we showed the principals we were a force to be reckoned with. Even though I dont make a lot of money officiating HS, there are some really good officials in this state and we have quite a few collegiate refs out there.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by LouisianaDave

Then the association must use the an assignor paid for and hired by the principals.

Interesting. Could it be that JAR's assignor's little conflict-of-interest kept his association from coming together and voting on this? Or do the officials operate separately from the assignor?

When I worked in NO (for one season only), we had an older gentleman who assigned by having everyone stand around him and throw up their hands for games for the next few weeks. Weird, weird system. Don't remember how much we got paid then -- I was just happy to get out and work a few games a week, then. Of course, I was a young kid then, and had little other demands on my free time.

[LouisianaDave]

When it comes to the assignors, its definitely a weird situation. Every association must have a president and a board. But the assignors have all the power, because our assignor tried to implore us before we voted to think about the kids, etc. So there is definitely a conflict of interest. We use the arbiter but there is no public ratings you just get an email saying you have games then you go on the arbiter and see what you get, sort of like christmas every wednesday morning, lol

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by LouisianaDave

The attitudes of JAR is the reason that Louisiana is so cheaply paid. I work for the Baton Rouge association and we held a special meeting and the members voted to be unavailable. All this talk of contracts is irrelevant. The way the association works, the principals enter into an agreement with an officials association to use their officials. Then the association must use the an assignor paid for and hired by the principals. On Feb 1, all except for 3 officials were unavailable to work and therefore games had to be postponed. As independent contractors we have the right to be available or unavailable.

As JAR state principals voted down the pay raise due to the threat of a strike. The principals figured there wasnt enough unity amongst officials to actually follow through on the walkout, but when the games got postponed the officials showed the principals there are more guys willing to stay home(me) than guys who were working (JAR). Even though 4 associations sat that is a misleading quote. There were 4 association who were done for the season. For one Tuesday night the officials of the following cities sat Shreveport, Monroe, Hammond, Alexandria, Baton Rouge, Thibidoux and a majority of New Orleans. Lafayette didnt vote and worked and Lake Charles worked.

So by uniting as one, we showed the principals we were a force to be reckoned with. Even though I dont make a lot of money officiating HS, there are some really good officials in this state and we have quite a few collegiate refs out there.

Thanks for the info, Dave. It sure is a little bit different than some of the things we've been told. Keep on fighting the good fight. if you don't, they'll still be trying to pay you $36/game twenty years from now.

The sad part is that the JAR's of the world will get the increase too even though they did everything they could to maintain the status quo.

The concept of having an assignor whose best interests obviously lie contrary to the officials that he's assigning is just plain ridiculous imo. There's nothing to stop that assignor from punishing officials for their work refusal by withholding future game assignments from them.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by LouisianaDave

The attitudes of JAR is the reason that Louisiana is so cheaply paid. I work for the Baton Rouge association and we held a special meeting and the members voted to be unavailable. All this talk of contracts is irrelevant. The way the association works, the principals enter into an agreement with an officials association to use their officials. Then the association must use the an assignor paid for and hired by the principals. On Feb 1, all except for 3 officials were unavailable to work and therefore games had to be postponed. As independent contractors we have the right to be available or unavailable.

As JAR state principals voted down the pay raise due to the threat of a strike. The principals figured there wasnt enough unity amongst officials to actually follow through on the walkout, but when the games got postponed the officials showed the principals there are more guys willing to stay home(me) than guys who were working (JAR). Even though 4 associations sat that is a misleading quote. There were 4 association who were done for the season. For one Tuesday night the officials of the following cities sat Shreveport, Monroe, Hammond, Alexandria, Baton Rouge, Thibidoux and a majority of New Orleans. Lafayette didnt vote and worked and Lake Charles worked.

So why did you not have a special meeting before this current contract was signed and demand a raise then? And how is the contract irrelevant, whether you like the way the system is structured or not? As you point out, we, as individuals are not contracted and have the right to sit out at any time. But you think it's okay to desert your assignor in the middle of the season? Also, if you were done for the season, what changed? All we have is a promise to reconsider the proposal, or a similar proposal. This promise, in and of itself, seems to me to mean very little.

[LouisianaDave]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So why did you not have a special meeting before this current contract was signed and demand a raise then? And how is the contract irrelevant, whether you like the way the system is structured or not? As you point out, we, as individuals are not contracted and have the right to sit out at any time. But you think it's okay to desert your assignor in the middle of the season? Also, if you were done for the season, what changed? All we have is a promise to reconsider the proposal, or a similar proposal. This promise, in and of itself, seems to me to mean very little.

The contracts are signed in Aug by the assocations president, schools and assignors. The raise proposal is was on the convention floor to be voted on the last weekend in January. It would be hard to have a meeting to work/not work in August when the vote isnt for another 5/6months.

Sitting out that day I feel made more of a point to show the principals that you reneged on your promise, and that we are taking a stand. There is only so much loyolty I will show an assignor, I felt this was bigger than what was being called deserting him. Its not like he hires and fires me like a collegiate assignor can, all he can do send me to worse games and I felt the juice was worth the squeeze.

The Baton Rouge association was not done for the season. The associations who were done for the season revoted after the emergency meeting to go back to work. Even though its all a promise and they could vote down the raise again, we officials are working in good faith. The publicity generated is enough to show that if they do vote down the raise in June for the next year, then when enough football officials strike and there is no football in Louisiana then the principals will be shown publicly that they cant be trusted. In this instance the media helped bring to light the reason why Louisiana is paid so poorly and its because of the principals.

[azbigdawg]

When I read this... I realize how good we have it here in AZ. ONE office assigns the games.... no (very little) backstabbing... No (very little) elitism... you work what you earn... the control some AD's and principals have is mind blowing and puzzling... .they should have NO say in who officiates their games...