Let me give you a "for instance"... I am going to use the Metroplex Tennis Officials Association purely as an example. None of this has ever happened here so just remember its a supposition.
Suppose someone who is a member of the MTOA decided that they wanted to have their own officials organization here in the Metroplex so they began to do the following:
1. Enlist others to join their new group.
2. Contact tournament directors and offer to undercut the established pay scale.
3. Promise there would be health care and unemployment benefits for those who join them.
We have had issues here in the Metroplex over small things such as providing meals but never something of this magnitude but we have always been able to work through things and remain solidified as an OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION. A legitimate association can negotiate many things for members but since we are private contractors, I'm not sure we're ready to start asking for health care. I do think it is a critical issue when it comes to forming associations within associations and undercutting established pay scales.
I'm just wondering about this issue. Would love to hear from you...
9 comments:
I can tell you from past experience that some officials will try to "steal" your tournaments. I had one official go to the coach in charge and tell him that she would undercut my price substantially and save him a ton of money if he would just use her as the referee.
He told her that she needed to go back home and mind her own business.
He is now my favorite coach!
How sad. But what is really sad is that most everyone who reads this has a fairly good idea who "she/her" is. Because it has happened more than once. If its not the same "she/her", then how tragic that there is more than one fellow official who would do this.
But on to the union question. Maybe I'm too 'old school' when it comes to our profession. I do this for the love of the game AND some extra spending money. Most of the time it seems that we are able to work out the glitches (pay, hours, meals, etc.) I fear that unionizing would bring in more headaches than we need thus taking some of the fun out of it. Higher fees, union dues, etc. etc. all get passed on to the players. Maybe fewer of them participate thus reducing revenues and ultimately the events need fewer officials and we get less work. I would have to see a lot of compelling evidence to get on this bandwagon.
WOW I'm all for unions. Here's why:
1) We get to pay union dues which will be more expensive but surely will go to a good cause
2) We won’t have to dry courts after rain delays cause it won’t be in our job description
3) We will get workers comp if we get hit on the side of the head by an errant tennis ball
4) We will get paid double overtime for working more than 8 hours on one day, on weekends and holidays
5) We won’t have to open and mark new tennis balls cause that won’t be in our job description either
6) We will get guaranteed breaks throughout the day and won’t have to think what to do cause thinking is definitely not part of a union’s job description.
7) Instead of making on-court decisions, we will get to pass the buck and rely on management to make the ruling.
8) We will get the opportunity to picket with our brothers and sisters in fellow unions when they go on strike
9) We won’t have to worry about which assignments to put in for – those will be assigned by management
10) And best of all, we will all get to vote for Obama and any other democrat running for office
Where do we sign up???
Union's are dead when it comes to getting all officials under one roof. Just look at what happen to the Steel Mills, Automotive Industry, Electronic Industry. They priced theirselves right out of jobs. Yes I'm for better organization, but in our area, it all comes down to what the school wants and how far they are willing to pay. The BIG conferences can get a little bit more since they have an organization that all the schools have to abide with, but when it comes to Non-conference the coaches can and will select whomever what officials they want, pay what they desire, and choose how many officials they desire for their matches. As you well know it only take two certified officials for a match to be considered for ranking purposes. Therefore, bottom line is for the officials to be happy with waht they have as it could mean they will be standing outside instead of inside.
In the past there has been much discussion about the qualifications and abilities of some officials. If a union were instituted, these issues would all go away. The referees would have to choose by seniority, not ability. If there were any problems, it wouldn't be the officials fault because they are union, as if for some reason that means supprior.
Any officials that need a union to protect their work have great questions about their own abilities. If we have to have a union, then I don't have to umpire. It isn't worth the hassle.
Don't forget the added benefit that when the union runs the whole USTA into the ground, the federal government will step in to bail the entity out to preserve the unstainable union contract benefits. Maybe the SEIU would take up our organizational rights.
If this actually happens then the Sectional Chairman should step in and do something.
Wait! We don't have a Sectional Chairman that does anything.
I know of one official from College Station that will sell the soul of her loved ones in order to steal a tournament. Does anybody NOT know who that person would be!
In a sense we are already a "union" in the Metroplex. We pay dues and we are an organization with bargaining powers. Perhaps we should utilize them more often... For those who are quick to criticize a decent pay scale for officials, they should take a look at what the Texas Section makes off of every tournament and every participant.
Post a Comment