The associations, through their membership, should be able to set those assignors' fees. I've been part of groups where the prevailing attitude was: Take it or leave it. And I'm not fond of that.

I assigned a summer baseball league where I needed 44 umpires at once every week and it was a real nightmare scheduling umpires 36-44. The first 36 were easy and I didn't have to put any time in. Getting those last 8-10 umpires was a freaking nightmare.

That said, at least in the places where I paid an assigning fee directly I knew what it was. Here where I live now, I get paid $60 for a game and have no idea what the assignor gets paid for filling the slots. And the more annoying part about the pay issue is that the schools typically pay timers/scorers more than they pay us -- they're required to pay officials the conference rate, but there's nothing stopping them from paying fellow teachers more than that for working the clock or the book.

In your day job, do you know how much your boss makes? Is it common to know how much your boss makes?

To a degree, the assignor works for the teams/schools. The schools are hiring them to find officials for their games. Short of some state governing body restricting how the assignor is supposed to operate,. It is no different than a general contractor subbing out work to electricians and plumbers. They don't know how much the general makes and shouldn't care as long as they receive a fair wage for the work they do.

No Arbiter being using for any of the Boo Williams games.

In your world are we allowed to care why we are forking over $5 per official for an association/assignor tool?

I thought you said integrity doesn't play a part in this? Now you are saying how does one know what the hidden expenses are. Make up your mind.

Again I ask, why should the officials bear the burden or the association tool? The assignor makes that money back the very first game assigned to each official through the 8-10% assignor's fee. The assignor is making a healthy profit assigning games why can't it be an business expense for him/her or the association itself. Yet to see that answer.

In many areas, the assignor works for the association. I worked for an association where we had to pay 11% of the game fee to the assignor and he only assigned to the association -- nobody else.

He's not "the boss." The association hires him, so he works for the association. The board decided who will assign and how much he will get -- so it's absolutely the business of membership how much the assignor makes and it should be public. And if the membership doesn't like how much he's getting, they should be able to replace the board with people willing to make the decision to pay the assignor less.

And still, many associations try to hide how much the assignor makes to keep others from organizing and voting the board out of office. Amazes me how much politics are involved.

I recognize that some areas, including where you live, have assignors-for-life who don't seem to answer to anyone and who have the fear of membership. I find that unfortunate.

There is no question of integrity here. I didn't say things should be done with no integrity. I am not sure how you think there is an integrity issue unless you're suggesting they're telling you that it costs them X but it really only costs them a much smaller amount.

The assignor has a cost that he's passing on. You may not like it. You may disagree with it. You're an independent contractor and don't have to sign up for the games.

How the money is itemized doesn't really matter. All you are really arguing for is a increase in pay (decrease in the assignors pay). It is nothing more than a red herring to quibble over how the total dollars are divided into categories. If the percentage were just a bit higher and they didn't itemize that one item, would it be an issue?

Why should the assignor take a deduction in pay any more than you?

Sure, they could easily do that. But that really isn't the discussion. The primary point of this thread was about which way to arrange to arrange the dollars, not so much about how much they get paid. In the case where the schools are doing the hiring, it really isn't the officials business to know how much they are getting.

If they are paid from the board, it would be.

As I've said before, the way it is divided really doesn't make a hill of beans difference. 2 + 2 is 4. Regardless whether the $4 comes from one source or $2 comes from two sources, the net is the same. (made up numbers just to make the point).

It is more about envy than politics. Assignors can make a decent amount of money....more than some people make in their day jobs. I really wouldn't want dozens of people always trying to disrupt the organization and take it over. That never works well.

Not sure what you're talking about here. No one fears our commissioner. He is very well respected (not by all, but by most). He's only been an assignor because he's generally done a very good job. He's had completion over the years but most of the would be challengers were laughable. No one felt they could do the job. If a good candidate had run for the position, who knows what would have happened.

Transparency ...
 

Here in my little corner of the Land of Steady Habits, the Arbiter fee is $1,900.00, and is paid for by my local board, from the general fund, not by the assignment commissioner.

Because it is the association/assignor's business expense, not mine. The assignor already gets paid by me (8% of my salary) to assign me games and the association already gets a registration fee from me that covers my tangible administrative costs. BTW, in my association officials only pay the $5 per seat cost if they register after the set deadline.

So obviously there are some assignors/associations that agree with my stance that the MEMBERSHIP (not employees or soldiers) should not be burdended with the normal operating costs of Arbiter.

Heavens to Betsy.

+1

Those assignors/association just increase their percentage or membership dues to cover additional expenses (or reduce the game fees and have the schools pay for it). The fact that some list it as a separate item still doesn't change anything. I suppose you'd rather they just take an addition % out of each game...but that would make those that work a lot of games pay more for it for those that work few games. If you don't have membership dues that could include it, a flat fee for something that is a flat cost/official expense is the fairest way to do it.

Still, no matter how you slice the pie, it comes out the same.

Lawrence Peter Berra ...
 

“You better cut the pizza in four pieces because I’m not hungry enough to eat six.”

You type as if I don't know the accounting of the association before and after it purchased Arbiter. Do you seriously think I would make the comment I made without knowing personally how things were done and accounted for. Are you really that arrogant or do you just think everybody is stupid? :confused:

Both. :(