What's the deal with ArbiterPay?

[Welpe]

their response being we wouldn't get paid for games.

How exactly did they expect that to go? 

[hefnerjm]

"Another question on how the pay thing works.  Do you still give the school a paper paysheet?  If not, how do they know who and how much to pay mileage too?"

Yes, give them the regular pay sheet.  There is a way in Arbiter to show mileage, but there are problems with it.  I use a PO box and they use the center of my zip to calculate mileage.  No big deal really but it doesn't seem to be very accurate.  I'll continue handing the schools my pay sheet for sure.

My understanding is that the milage is paid based on the number of miles from Arbiter (I think this is the center of your home zip code, and not exactly door to door per GoogleMaps).  The variance is so small as to not really worry about imho.  You can check any game assignment (or the first game assignment for a given site/day in the case of multiple games at a site on the same day) to see the calculated mileage for that game.

From there it is as simple as telling the AD or game admin who drove on a sign-in sheet (much different than leaving W-9s and SSNs laying around.).

[hefnerjm]

My 2 cents to offer on this subject too.  We use ZW so obviously we have to change for next season but that does not mean it will be Arbiter. There is a group/committee currently evaluating systems and, from what I've heard, the front runner is not Arbiter. Earlier this year a school in our area called our secretary to inform us they were moving to ArbiterPay. They were told we are on ZW with no plans to change with their response being we wouldn't get paid for games. Immediate response was we would not send them officials. Needless to say that school district didn't switch to ArbiterPay.

TxPan,
Id like to better understand the push back against Arbiter.  I personally haven't heard of any other viable alternate provider for game assignment/officials' pay (especially now that ZW was sold).  So, maybe your committee/group has some kind of inside scoop...either way, I would personally like to get smarter on why there was such a harsh adversarial response to the school at the suggestion of using Arbiter.

My personal take is that if officials associations are treating our schools as customers, and your customer decides that ArbiterPay works best for them, I would hope there is a very strong alternative readily available for game assignments/pay in order to have firm standing to threaten not servicing that customer.  Without that alternative in place, the customer will find an alternate source of officials at the first opportunity...and I know that some guys in our chapter love those long road trips.

[kid50]

As a multi-sport assigner, I am very familiar with the quirks of Arbiter (slow servers, error messages, failure to send emails, hour waits for customer service, etc.).  After this season it was going to be my recommendation that we change vendors.  Now with the buyout of ZebraWare, I do not see an alternative.  Those of you researching this, are they other quality vendors of a similar product to evaluate?

[TexDoc]

https://www.zebraweb.org/sec/

[Rulesman]

https://www.zebraweb.org/sec/

PM me if you need contact information. I went with them when Assign by Web folded and the customer service has been great. Arbiter, to this day, hasn't retuned my calls.

[mobetta285]

I will be opening a savings account at my local credit union (requires a $25 deposit). After payment is received I will then transfer that money into my checking account. The most they can steal then would be $25.00. Not having used ArbiterPay yet, I am sure I'll have plenty of questions, but from what I've read and heard from fellow officials that use it already, it's a breeze. So long as I get paid in a timely manner (yeah right), and it makes tracking payments easier, then I'm fine with it. My $.02.

[TexDoc]

I will be opening a savings account at my local credit union (requires a $25 deposit). After payment is received I will then transfer that money into my checking account. The most they can steal then would be $25.00. Not having used ArbiterPay yet, I am sure I'll have plenty of questions, but from what I've read and heard from fellow officials that use it already, it's a breeze. So long as I get paid in a timely manner (yeah right), and it makes tracking payments easier, then I'm fine with it. My $.02.

JB!!  What's up!

Arbiter Pay works great.  Pay is usually faster.  Some things I don't like about it, but really not too bad. 

[TXPanhandle]

TxPan,
Id like to better understand the push back against Arbiter.  I personally haven't heard of any other viable alternate provider for game assignment/officials' pay (especially now that ZW was sold).  So, maybe your committee/group has some kind of inside scoop...either way, I would personally like to get smarter on why there was such a harsh adversarial response to the school at the suggestion of using Arbiter.

My personal take is that if officials associations are treating our schools as customers, and your customer decides that ArbiterPay works best for them, I would hope there is a very strong alternative readily available for game assignments/pay in order to have firm standing to threaten not servicing that customer.  Without that alternative in place, the customer will find an alternate source of officials at the first opportunity...and I know that some guys in our chapter love those long road trips.

My apologies HefnerJM for the delayed response.  It’s actually pretty simple.  Many in our chapter have expressed bad experiences with Arbiter.  Terrible customer support to system functionality.  When it comes to ArbiterPay it does not make sense for a chapter to move if only one school is inquiring.  And yes, only one school expressed that interest and at that time the acquisition of ZebraWare was not in play. 

We do treat our schools like they are our customers but not to the extent that we let that customer dictate how you are going to run your business.  It’s a strong enough argument to make that if a customer threatens to not pay you for the service you provide you simply do not provide that service.  If you owned your own business (which I do) you also would not have your customer dictate to you what systems/software you’re going to utilize.  If these same customers want to find an alternate source of officials they are more than welcome to do so.  Losing a few customers would only help us ensure we can appropriately cover games for the good customers.  If any chapter has officials willing to drive 7 plus hours one-way to do a game for $60 they are more than welcome to contact our chapter board and request. 

[hefnerjm]

TXPan,

I think we can all agree that probably the #1 "low-hanging fruit" for Arbiter is to improve their customer support...especially for new customers.  Working in the IT industry might make me a little more patient for the realities of a helpdesk support structure than your average user.

I guess I am also speaking  through the lens of having worked almost exclusively with Arbiter and only hearing stories of the old days of paper contracts and soliciting schools for games. 
From the pay perspective, I also only have two experiences from which to speak:  using ArbiterPay (in Michigan) and carrying a W-9/ pay sheet to every game and getting paid by check directly from the schools (in Texas). 

Regardless of the level of customer support, the security of information, and speed of pay far outweigh the alternative. 

I personally look at the tech support as an issue of stewardship within our chapters...Whenever a chapter adopts a new tool, Arbiter or otherwise, you should have someone identified as the expert for the tool, and that person should be the first point of contact for chapter members.  90% of the questions that are asked could be answered internally if you get a younger, tech savvy member to serve the membership as a front line on how to use a new tool.  (in the industry, we actually call it "on-site support"). 
Then if that person cant answer the question, you allow them to act as the go-between for the customer service with the product supplier.   (I personally think this is rarely done because of a reluctance for older members to allow younger members into leadership roles...not just in officiating, but in many business environments as well).

I agree that moving to AP based on one school is probably not justified.  I will be interested to hear how the ZW acquisition affects the conversation about assigning software in general and ArbiterPay specifically.  But I think it may be hasty to reject the best product on the market because of a few growing pains that could be mitigated by putting the right structures in place.