Would You Accept?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

When I lived in GA from '96-00 some officiating groups worked together to get high schools to raise fees (at the time it was $35 for varsity). It was working well until other groups agreed to work for the going rate and then others agreed to work for $30 per game. Eventually we all lost out.

I believe that's called a free market. It's the same as Store A selling a widget for $10, and Store B selling it for $7. Store A can get as mad as they want, but the market is what it is.

To the OP's question, I lean toward "yes." I'm not a big fan of unions, typically due to the sense of entitlement they often emit. (See Camron's Detroit example, and I could cite other local ones that hurt businesses here.) When someone strikes, they simply choose not to work. If someone else wants to work in their place, the striker has no-one to blame but himself.

However, in many ways, our associations/boards are unions. They make the relationships with schools, get and assign the work, negotiate the fees, and train the officials (in varying degrees). They also forbid its members going to schools directly to get work and negotiate fees. That's what's needed for an any association to be effective. If the association is not getting work, though, then it's not being very effective.

If I found a league to be treating officials unacceptably, then of course I wouldn't work for it. It would have to be a damn good reason, though. Otherwise, I'm in. If you don't want to work, I'll gladly serve.