There has been much ado in our tennis officiating world about the new criminal background checks, their validity, and the motives behind requiring them. We will do a multi-part blog series dealing with this issue.
In order to check out the true beginning of this whole issue, please read the following:
5 comments:
I think the jury is still out on the procedure and parameters of the background checks. It quite likely may have been poorly thought out and implemented. (Imagine that, using usta and poorly thought out in the same sentence!)
Having said that, it is crystal clear that the usta dropped the ball by not having something in place previously that would prevent sex offenders from being around children. Every organization from Boy Scouts to church youth groups have had screening procedures in place for many years now. Thank goodness it didn't take the assault of an innocent child to get the usta's attention.
What is in place now is probably not the best answer, but at least it will begin to identify those who need closer scrutiny.
WOW now you have a background approved USTA officials working for a non-background checked Tournament Director who hires a non-background checked site directors.
The USTA could not implement a background check in earlier years because they had too many criminals of some sort and they were protecting their own kind UNTIL the Press got wind of it.
Sure is easy to be a monday morning quarter-back. They are doing something - now all we have to do is understand why and make an informed decision to work OR not to work. STOP COMPLAINING - you have a choice!
I thought DIVERSITY RULES!!!
And now the USTA suits are having to backtrack. Imagine that!!
Post a Comment