RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => Texas Topics => Topic started by: ETXZebra on May 08, 2017, 12:16:28 PM
-
What are everybody’s thoughts on the new UIL 1204 Mileage Reimbursement proposal?
-
Is the actual proposal posted somewhere?
-
Google UIL 1204 Mileage Reimbursement proposal
-
https://www.uiltexas.org/policy/mileagefeeproposal
-
The rates for distant games absolutely stinks. If you worked a game 125 miles away, you are essentially getting $55 for driving 250 miles, where the state rate is somewhere around $0.535 per mile, or what should come out to $133.75. Once again, officials are not coming out on top.
I do have another question. For those guys that live way out from the center of their chapter's home, do they get paid the full mileage when working 5 miles from home? I guess that's fair since they don't get compensated for driving into town for games.
-
Be glad you're getting any mileage. There are states who would kill for that luxury.
-
i live 70 miles from the center point of my chapter and have games 90 miles further from that point. I will be driving 5-1/2 to 6 hours round trip plus a tank of gas for basically nothing. It's not fair to the schools either. The schools on the outer reaches of area will always pay more than the schools closer to the center hub.
-
It appears the mileage is a flat fee based upon mileage whether you ride or drive.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
It appears the mileage is a flat fee based upon mileage whether you ride or drive.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Looks like everyone pitches in for the adult beverages then! yEs:
-
When will they post the police officer fee schedule, trainer fee schedule, ticket taker, concession stand worker fee schedule, EMT worker, Coach, ETC ETC.
-
I don't know about you all, but as much as my property valuation increased this year, the schools are going to be getting a fat raise all across the state. There is plenty of money to pay the referees what they've always paid the referees. I don't understand why TASO would fight to the death (lawsuit) over keeping the organization in tact...only to allow this. The $10 increase in game fee is going to turn into a $50 loss in mileage...and like a true bureaucracy, they are gonna pee on your leg and tell you it's raining.
I'm retired from this circus...but it still saddens me that we don't organize and stand up for ourselves. Instead, we have people say things like, "Be glad you're getting any mileage. There are states who would kill for that luxury." The shortage of officials can easily be fixed...but not by offering someone $5/hour to do this. We know that it takes about 8-10 years to get really good at this...and that the expectations have never been higher from kids, parents, coaches, and the media. Why are we willing to give our time away? Sometimes we are our own worst enemy!
-
And I stand by that statement.
-
And I stand by that statement.
What makes this point really weak: Look at the revenues generated by Texas high school varsity football teams compared to other states. Look at attendance at the games and the palaces being built for many of the schools/teams. Texas is different and we should not be comparing ourselves to other states, who have no where near the numbers or the football palaces being built. We should be taking the lead and blazing the trail. These mileages could be worse, but they could be a heck of a lot better for an officiating organization that's losing membership and not recruiting enough to support the needs of the schools. At every negotiation with the UIL for pay, TASO has to remind everyone the current condition we are in with regards to our numbers. Simply put, pay is the top issue for our short numbers, followed by how officials are treated on and off the field. Both must be addressed aggressively before our numbers are going to get better. We have a huge group of guys over 50 that are going to be retiring in the next 10 years. By then, it will be too late.
-
What makes this point really weak: Look at the revenues generated by Texas high school varsity football teams compared to other states. Look at attendance at the games and the palaces being built for many of the schools/teams. Texas is different and we should not be comparing ourselves to other states, who have no where near the numbers or the football palaces being built. We should be taking the lead and blazing the trail. These mileages could be worse, but they could be a heck of a lot better for an officiating organization that's losing membership and not recruiting enough to support the needs of the schools. At every negotiation with the UIL for pay, TASO has to remind everyone the current condition we are in with regards to our numbers. Simply put, pay is the top issue for our short numbers, followed by how officials are treated on and off the field. Both must be addressed aggressively before our numbers are going to get better. We have a huge group of guys over 50 that are going to be retiring in the next 10 years. By then, it will be too late.
The statement I stand by is that officials in MOST states would kill for the mileage paid in Texas. How is that a weak argument?
-
It is weak because you are inferring that we should be thankful we are not in other states and having to "live with" their pay scale for mileage. Weakening the travel pay is what seems to be happening here, along with capitulating to the schools' demands/requests, and the inference that we should be thankful it isn't worse just doesn't hold water. We should hold our ground for what we have and work to get it bettered. My 2 cents, for what it's worth. The weaker we make it, the more people we lose and the harder it is to recruit.
The state has a mileage rate for a reason. We should be using it.
-
From this statement in the email, it's apparent that TASO has accepted the proposal. Very disappointed in our representation.
"We don’t know what the Legislative Council will do, however, it will be presented at their June meeting in Austin. The SOC has been working on this plan for almost 3 years. A lot of time and effort has been put forth into this proposal. Knowing that there is no ONE plan that is going to work for the entire state, this seems to be the next best thing. If you remember, the SOC is made up of 4 officials and 5 school administrators."
Are any of the 4 officials on the committee TASO football members?
-
I want to make clear that although I don't particularly agree with the new mileage or other things our TASO leadership might do, I am very grateful for those guys stepping up and doing what they can and representing us. I don't want to diminish all the work they have done and do for us. You'll never make everyone happy. That's for sure.
-
I agree Doc, these guys put a lot of effort into this. My question is, what was so unfair about the way it was?
-
What I heard is that the schools want to get a better handle on their budgeting. What makes little sense in that argument is, they have no idea what the pay to officials will be anyway, since we are paid by gate receipts. If they really have that much trouble budgeting, they need to find people who can do the job a little better. But then again, who wants to work at a business office for a ISD, no offense to anyone who does. You can make a heck of a lot more in private industry.
-
TexDoc,
Remember that varsity football is the only sport /level that gets paid based on gate receipts. All other sports/levels are flat fee. So simplifying the budget is a legitimate thing with the mileage.
-
TexDoc,
Remember that varsity football is the only sport /level that gets paid based on gate receipts. All other sports/levels are flat fee. So simplifying the budget is a legitimate thing with the mileage.
Simplification of the budget? Or, accuracy of the budget. They might not be mutually exclusive, but can certainly have differing metrics. My point is, the previous method of travel reimbursement should not, for someone with decent skills, be so complicated that a budget will be so far off as to cause huge problems. Once again, my 2 cents. I'm quite certain travel budgets for a ISD are much bigger and much more complicated and much further off at the end of any year than travel reimbursements for football officials.
Anyway, whatever is decided is fine with me. I just don't believe the schools saying it is too complicated to create a realistic budget. I think what's complicated is having to calculate differing mileages each week. ISD's tend to get a little lazy, IMHO. It really isn't all that complicated.
-
Much of the proposal was designed to address the issue of pay (or lack there of) for games being played 90+ miles one-way. I know the vast majority of officials in the Amarillo and South Plains chapters are tired of spending 7-8 hours out of their night to officiate a game and ultimately get a check for $60. Especially the newer officials who are college students and they realize they can make more money working somewhere else. And yes, to them it's all about the money. Getting paid $140 for that game instead of $60 can possibly make a big difference. Many are focusing on what the driver is losing in mileage when it's only that one driver (yes, we take one care to those game sites) that is seeing a reduction in their mileage check versus the other three or four officials in the vehicle get paid a little better for that game.
-
Local Control, Local Control, Local Control---
That is the educational buzz word that we need to focus on when speaking with ISD types. They love local control of everything except officiating. Curriculum, teacher pay, calendar, Stadiums, etc. etc. Currently the District X can pay their coach/AD/ticket taker/EMT/Security whatever they would like to pay them. District Y can pay theirs whatever they would like to pay them. So for whatever reason the only pay that is set by the state is "officials".
UIL needs to either set Cops, coaches, AD, ticket taker, trainer pay or deregulate our pay. I am most disappointed in TASO with never bringing this up to them and flat out asking them why everything else is local control and not us.
I get the budget argument. Unfortunately, we would have to give up the "gate" aspect of our pay if we are to help them with the budget argument. Why do we as an association care about gate like it is our golden unicorn? If we have to give up gate (for non playoff games) in order to get a 200% raise we need to get rid of gate.
Supply and Demand has been fixing problems in this country for a long time. We have adjusted every other variable out there except for pay. Until we can let pay move to market levels we will never be able to remove pay as a reason for the officiating shortage.
There are already "Have's" and "Have Not's" in high school sports. I don't see why it should be any different with officials.
-
Our chapter center has about 20 officials. The diameter is close to 200 miles across and another 80 about. Of the 80, I doubt if 10 can afford to donate close to 150 miles of travel 3 nights a week. And I assume the shortage of officials in west Texas won't be made up by the guys in San Antonio, or Ft Worth driving an additional 300 miles out of the goodness of their hearts.
This is making sitting home a real possibility.
-
When I first started officiating I was in the Panhandle and everything there is mileage and travel time. I didn't mind it but knew I was loosing money. Everything else kind of made up for it (that and driving a company car didn't hurt).
But seriously can anyone realistically think we can recruit some one and tell them they are going to lose money traveling 4-8 hours 2-3 nights a week?
Glad I have retired from the circus but still miss the performance.
-
Local Control, Local Control, Local Control---
That is the educational buzz word that we need to focus on when speaking with ISD types. They love local control of everything except officiating. Curriculum, teacher pay, calendar, Stadiums, etc. etc. Currently the District X can pay their coach/AD/ticket taker/EMT/Security whatever they would like to pay them. District Y can pay theirs whatever they would like to pay them. So for whatever reason the only pay that is set by the state is "officials".
UIL needs to either set Cops, coaches, AD, ticket taker, trainer pay or deregulate our pay. I am most disappointed in TASO with never bringing this up to them and flat out asking them why everything else is local control and not us.
I get the budget argument. Unfortunately, we would have to give up the "gate" aspect of our pay if we are to help them with the budget argument. Why do we as an association care about gate like it is our golden unicorn? If we have to give up gate (for non playoff games) in order to get a 200% raise we need to get rid of gate.
Supply and Demand has been fixing problems in this country for a long time. We have adjusted every other variable out there except for pay. Until we can let pay move to market levels we will never be able to remove pay as a reason for the officiating shortage.
There are already "Have's" and "Have Not's" in high school sports. I don't see why it should be any different with officials.
There is a perception that uncapped officiating rates could impact the fairness of the contest. You are a smart guy...surely you can see this. The cop or the ticket taker can't really influence the outcome of the contest. None of us would want to see some of the more favored crews in the state become further enriched by marketing themselves as better than others and thus "worth the extra money". Furthermore, none of us would want to get into a negative bidding war of getting to work Katy vs Spring Westfield or Allen vs Cedar Hill for $20 a game...just for the "experience" of working a big game in a big stadium. If you want a dose of this, just go work the UIL baseball tournament where you'll lose $200 if you only work one game, and up to about $600 if you are "lucky" enough to work until Saturday!
I think the local control issue could be resolved by each district publishing their pay rates in advance (or each chapter establishing the rates) and that they be consistently paid regardless of weather, attendance, or playoff status.
The forecast for officiating and umpires in Texas is looking pretty stormy. TASO's "head in the sand" approach is a recipe for failure. The UIL's willingness to further dig into the pockets of the officiating community will also prove to be a significant mitigating factor when we hit full crisis mode.
-
I agree with most of what blindref says in the above post. If the team Dr from team A has to provide medical services to a player from team B is he/she not going to provide those services to the best of their ability? If there is favoritism then deal with it, but that should not be a reason why we do not get paid a better rate. Do parents complain that the DC from district B is higher paid then the DC from district A and that is unfair?
The bidding wars are coming mark my words. There is too much invested for schools to get unqualified crews. The number of qualified/quality crews in Texas are getting smaller while the number of quality programs are getting larger. We may disagree on # of qualified/quality crews but we have to agree on our replacement rate of qualified/quality crews is getting lower and lower.
-
Did the proposal pass, or was it tabled for another year?
-
From the 1204 presently loaded on the UIL web site, it looks like nothing has changed, yet. I'm not certain when they would meet to approve this, but it seems like that would be in the fall sometime.
-
https://www.uiltexas.org/policy/mileagefeeproposal (https://www.uiltexas.org/policy/mileagefeeproposal)
I think it is still a proposal.